Origins of Bosnian Humor and Its Role During the Siege of Sarajevo
By David Orlov
A research thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Eurasian Studies
Nazarbayev University
Advisors: James Nikopoulos and Jean-Francois Caron External Advisor: Tanja Petrović
Introduction
During the socialist period, under the rule of Josip Broz Tito, Yugoslavia has experienced an unprecedented peaceful period that lasted for several decades, however, it was followed by the disastrous Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s. The breakup of the state was not peaceful, especially for Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has gone through the ethnic conflict, four years of siege of its capital, and genocide of around 8000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica. An interesting phenomenon is that despite these horrors jokes related to these events are widespread in Bosnia. At first glance it seems that humor in such context sounds inappropriate, but jokes related to the tragic events of the 1990s are numerous. A few years ago I came upon for the first time with the phenomenon of Bosnian humor. Specifically, I heard that people in Bosnia and Herzegovina tell jokes about the horrors they have lived through during the wars of the 1990s. While conducting a preliminary research one of the first jokes I found online was “How Auschwitz was better than Sarajevo?” and the answer is “At least there was gas.” The joke may raise moral concerns among outsiders, but it was, and still is, a normal phenomenon for people in Bosnia and Herzegovina to engage in self- deprecating humor. At the time, being unfamiliar with the humor research, it surprised me a lot. A layman, as I was one, usually assumes that horror and humor constitute conflicting mental states.1 That surprise rooted in my ignorance of the humor studies brought me to a current research. The present research provides an ethnographic study of Bosnian humor. The primary emphasis here is made on the siege humor. Sarajevo, the capital city of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was besieged from 5 April 1992 to 29 January 1996. Now it is known as the longest siege of a capital city in the history of modern warfare. Nevertheless, besieged Sarajevo is famous not only for the daily horrors experienced by its citizens and war crimes committed against them, but also for the spirit that helped the city to survive. Humor constituted significant part of that spirit. As Srdjan Vucetic, a scholar of Bosnian origins, in his article on humor and identity in Bosnia and Herzegovina, summed it up “Sarajevo owes a large part of its fame to the fabled spirit of its besieged citizens, who have employed humor to defuse the tension”.2 Although this statement is correct, assuming Sarajevan siege humor as only a coping mechanism that people have employed to diffuse tension is a too simplistic view of the phenomenon. For the purpose of writing this dissertation I conducted two fieldworks in Bosnia and Herzegovina, each lasting one month, in July 2019 and December 2019. While the primary emphasis is on the siege humor, a more broad study of Bosnian humor is under study here. At
1 Carroll, N. 1999, ‘Horror and Humor’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 145-160. 2 Srdjan Vucetic, S. 2004. “Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia”, Space of Identity, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7-34. first, my goal was to interview the general public. Before arrival to the field I was looking for the events to attend in Sarajevo and for people to meet in order to collect data. During the period of my first fieldwork WARM Festival was scheduled to be held in Sarajevo. It is an annual arts and human rights festival that attracts journalists, academics and artists from all over the world, many of whom were in Sarajevo during its siege. As my entry point to the Balkan region was Belgrade, where I applied for a Bosnian visa, I looked for participants of the festival who are based in Belgrade; Jelena Grujic was among them. Jelena is a Serbian journalist and human rights activist, who covered the first months of the siege of Sarajevo for a newspaper she worked for at the time. Our meeting has significantly contributed to this research. It turned out that Jelena knew a lot of people in Sarajevo, including the founder of the WARM festival as well as people who were actively engaged in the cultural life of Sarajevo during its siege. Her recommendations helped me to meet them, and they further provided me with more participants. During the period of two months in the field I’ve collected 27 interviews. Most of the participants belonged to the war-time generation, who have witnessed the conflict or fought in it. Apart from the general public, I interviewed people who fought in a cultural war against the besieger, who produced humor on radio, in TV shows, cinema and literature. This research treats humor and laughter as heuristics to study Bosnian culture overall. It does not only explain the role of humor, but also why it was present during the war and how it originated. Humor can provide information about the war and culture, trauma and memory, and local identities. Briefly stated, the argument runs as follows. It is true that humor in non-humorous contexts may be considered as a coping mechanism; the siege of Sarajevo is not an exception. However, in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina it should not be viewed as simply a response to this particular war. Humor as a coping mechanism has been there for generations and became a visible and differentiating element of Bosnian identity. By continuing to engage in self- directed humor during the war, Bosnians fought back by imitating normal life that they had before the war, and humor was part of that life. Humor, specifically, self-directed humor, is a cultural artifact differentiating Bosnians from other identity groups in the region, such as other national groups of the former-Yugoslavia. It is true that every group has a distinctive humor, and Serbs and Montenegrins in this region, for example, are also known for having a great sense of humor. The emphasis here, however, is on Bosnian humor, on its distinctive features and functions. As I will argue, one of its crucial functions is the restoration of dignity of a group that sees itself as a group that has been historically disadvantaged and suffered the most in comparison with others in the Balkan region. Bosnians were historically a peripheral group and had disadvantages comparing to other national groups, such as Serbs and Croats, for example, as Belgrade and Zagreb were the central cities. It is derived from self-perception of the participants of the research and the ways they think others perceive them. Some of the participants of the research have mentioned that Bosnia is like a child or orphan other groups try to take care of, or as a smaller nation; it will be later discussed in the chapter about origins of self-directed humor. The status of a peripheral group, it will be argued, gives a rise to stereotypes which are accepted by Bosnians and are at the core of Bosnian humor. Bosnians in the former Yugoslavia are considered, both by Bosnians themselves and others, as simple, open and nice people with a great sense of humor. The most important and widespread stereotypes about Bosnians is that they are funny and stupid. Here are few extracts form the interviews:
We have to admit that we are the stupid ones. Montenegrins are the lazy, and we are stupid.3
3 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with A.B. Camo. 24 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. I think we are a little primitive. We are accepting it like the folklore, as the way of communication.4
It is just that way of life, that street life, not in a bad way, the people who spend their whole days rolling around the city, drinking coffee, making jokes. It is just our way of life, it is slow.5
When you go on vacation to Croatian coast or to Serbia, generally you are very welcomed as Bosnian, being Bosnian meant and still means something appreciated, just because of our openness, readiness to make jokes on our own.6
Humor in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a daily attitude towards life, it belongs to ethnic consciousness, Bosnians believe that humor belongs to their identity and there is no surprise that it persisted during the war and the siege of Sarajevo.
Humor under extreme conditions
Despite the tragic events that took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the 1990s the local population was still able to tell jokes on the related topics and to laugh at them. However, the presence of humor in Bosnia during the war is not a unique phenomenon. Laughter may emerge in cases when no intent to amuse was made, or in a completely non-humorous situation.7 Humor has long existed in non-humorous contexts. For instance, Holocaust humor has attracted wide academic interest.”8 At the present date war related jokes, as the one about gas mentioned earlier, may sound abnormal or even immoral, especially if told by an outsider, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the war and during the siege of Sarajevo such jokes were normal. Bosnian humor attracts our attention specifically for this reason. We are concerned with the question of why Bosnian humor was such a widespread phenomenon, taking into consideration the conditions Bosnians were found in. Humor does not arise only in the moments when we are happy, on the contrary, it is a normal and widespread phenomenon in the contexts when we find ourselves miserable and depressed. One of the most famous quotes from Samuel Beckett is “nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I grant you that”.9 Similarly, Nietzsche has stated: “Perhaps I know best why man alone laughs, he alone suffers so deeply that he had to invent laughter.”10 Chaya Ostrower argues that when the situation is abnormal, ‘abnormal humor’ may be considered as normal behavior.11 Nihad Kreševljaković argues that humor under extreme conditions may be used as a weapon.12 Anthony J. Chapman argues that in such scenarios, when people are found in
4 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with P. Žalica. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 5 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Neira. 22 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 6 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S.Pecanin. 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 7 Robert R. Provine. 2000. Laughter. New York: Penguin Books. 8 Ostrower, C. 2015, “Humor as Defense Mechanism during the Holocaust”, A Journal of Bible and Theology, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 183-195. 9 Samuel Beckett. 1959. Endgame and Act Without Words. New York: Grove Press. 10 Leslie P. Theile. 1990. Friedrich Nietzsche and the politics of the soul:a study of heroic individualism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 11 Ostrower, “Humor as Defense Mechanism during the Holocaust.” 12 Nihad Kreševljaković, “Humor under siege: Mujo, don't jump around, you'll get hungry.” Aljazeera, 22 November, 2015, http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/humor-under-siege-mujo-dont-jump-around-youll-get- hungry. miserable situations, are in pain or oppressed, humor may be widespread.13 Laughter prospers not only out of positive emotions, but also when we feel embarrassment, fear, grief, etc.14 Depending on a situation humor performs varying functions, among them is self-preservation in the face of suffering. Laughter may be an outcome of non-humorous situations; humor is a tool to avoid seriousness. Wallace Chafe claims that we often refer to humor in order to feel non-seriousness, as it is pleasurable comparing to the reality of life.15 This however does not imply that humor is just a coping mechanism, and neither of the mentioned scholars would argue that. The goal here is to show that widespread literature on the subject might point out lack of novelty in the research under study. There is no uniqueness in terms of the use of humor in a non-humorous context, but case of Bosnian humor is interesting not because it constitutes a unique phenomenon, it does not. However, the extent to which humor was widespread may be not unprecedented, but at least very rare. One of the interviews I have conducted was with Remy Ourdan, a French journalist who was in Sarajevo during the whole period of its siege and covered it for Le Monde as freelance correspondent and then as a journalist. Apart from that, Ourdan covered events during the wars in Croatia and Kosovo, intervention in Serbia, insurgency in Macedonia, conflict in Congo, the Eritrean-Ethiopian war, and the civil war in Sierra Leone, the U.S. interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as Al-Qaida’s jihad. Here is his comment on Bosnian war humor:
I suspect there was always this sense of humor. But during the siege because of that brutal switch to an extreme survival mode, and because you can die any minute, I think there was also an extreme sense of humor. So, that means people would gather in cafes without coffee, they would still do it, and comment and make jokes. I have been to many war zones, there is always this moment to get a little bit of air, a little bit of humor. But never like here, in Bosnia it was special.
Humor is a normal response when the context is extreme, when human life is threatened, however, the case of Bosnian and Herzegovina can suggest something more than that because, as I will later argue, it was not just a response to this particular war. The specificity and abundance that Ourdan has noticed in case of Bosnian war humor should be explained by looking at its origins. If the war itself is not a single variable explaining Bosnian case, there has to be other explanations. It has to do with local culture, it is not just a coping mechanism, it is linked to identity of people living in this country. Why humor had such a big role during the war, after it, and generally, in lives of Bosnians? Why Bosnians think that humor belongs to their identity? Why they assume that they have good sense of humor or like to think so? Why do they enjoy having an identity of the funniest in the region? Why they choose to make fun of themselves rather than of others? I ask these questions because participants of the research expressed their believe that humor belongs to their identity, that most of Bosnians have a good sense of humor, which is mostly directed at themselves, and that it is of huge importance in their daily lives.
Universal and contextual nature of humor
An important feature of humor is that it is shared. Statistically, people laugh much more when they are in a group rather than alone, and even when we watch a comedy or read a book
13 Chapman, A.J. 1983. “Humor and Laughter in Social Interaction and Some.” In P.E. McGhee and J.H. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research. New-York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 135-158. 14 Ibid. 15 Wallace Chafe. 2007. The Importance of Not Being Earnest. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. and laugh, are we actually alone?16 Henri Bergson, in a hugely influential work for humor studies ‘Le Rire’ (Laughter, an essay on the meaning of the comic), argued that it is easier to laugh with others than while being alone.17 So, humor is not individual, it assumes both the self and the other, it is a social phenomenon. Laughter, on the contrary, is not necessarily shared, one may start to laugh without inviting others to join. Whether we “laugh with” or “laugh at” can tell us a lot about the relationships within society. Humor is versatile, it exists in serious and non-serious situations, it may point out hostility or affiliation.18 Humor is ubiquitous and universal; it exists in all societies. At the same time, humor is culture specific, what may be found humorous in one society may appear as offensive or unacceptable in another one.19 Same could be claimed in relation to time, what was funny ages ago may not be amusing at present, thus, humor depends on the context: “whether or not one laughs or smiles in a certain situation communicates a wealth of information about the subjects involved and their roles within that context.”20 If we go back to the joke ‘How Auschwitz was better than Sarajevo’, in most places around the world it would be unacceptable to tell it. Nevertheless, in Sarajevo, it was a very famous joke made by the Sarajevans themselves. Even at present date most of the people who were in the city during the siege still remember it. For an outsider, the joke has a terrible connotation as it raises moral concerns if someone would try to make a joke about the gas chambers or Auschwitz, considering the extermination that took place over there. In the case of Sarajevo, it was a joke about necessity. There was a shortage of gas, water, cigarettes and hygiene products during the siege; the normal way of life was challenged. People could not make coffee without gas, could not keep themselves clean as there was no water and washing clothes and themselves in the Miljacka river was too dangerous as there were snipers around the city, although people still did it. The response of the besieged population was to make fun of themselves, as they used to do even before the war. If you ask a Bosnian to inform you about their humor, one of the first things that would be mentioned is that it is very dark: “Whatever happens in the morning, by the night we have a joke about it. Especially if it is something really bad, something we shouldn’t joke about” or “If we are talking about specifics of our way of humor it's a dark humor. It's kind of tragic comedy.” Jokes about necessity and poverty, if not universal, at least exist in numerous societies, and in our case this universal topic of humor was placed into a specific cultural context, where dark humor is widespread. Though Bosnians used to tell this joke, even in Sarajevo there could be a context, where the joke could be perceived as unacceptable. One of the interviewees, Slobodanka Lizdek, who worked with foreign journalists during the siege told me a story that took place in the iconic Holiday Inn hotel, which was a residence for the war reporters:
I was with my colleges, journalists, and it was one of the foreign officials, he came to the restaurant at the hotel. And he probably heard this jokes from Bosnians, and we can tell it because we were the ones who are suffered. And he said ‘You know what is the difference between Auschwitz and Sarajevo?’ And then my boyfriend, he is Jewish, he got mad, took him outside and told to never ever again enter this restaurant. But if I told it to him, he wouldn’t be mad at me, because I was suffering.21
16 Provine, Laughter. 17 Henry Bergson. 2003. Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic. Salt Lake City: The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. 18 Philip Glenn and Elizabeth Holt. 2013. Studies of Laughter in Interaction. London: Bloomsbury. 19 Simon Critchley. 2002. On Humor. London: Routledge. 20 Nikopoulos, J. 2016. “The Stability of Laughter”, Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. 21 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S. Lizdek. 15 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina.
Simon Critchley, in his book On Humor, views comic world, or comical situation, as a place populated by people knowing the rules of the game and taking part in it, when someone throws you a ball, you do not keep it in your pocket, instead, you throw it back, same is in humor.22 When Bosnians exchanged this and similar jokes they were playing a game, the rules of which they knew. There was a tacit consensus about what constitutes local humor and what jokes were allowed to be said. However, in the case of Jewish journalists he did not throw the ball back, as for him the context of the joke was horrible, and in the end the humorous aspect of the game collapsed, there was no consensus between the journalist and the joke teller. Critchley argues, “in order for the incongruity of the joke to be seen as such, there has to be a congruence between joke structure and social structure” – our example confirms this statement, the joke did not fit the social structure, where there was a person who would be offended by it, only those who were there and suffered were allowed to tell it. Critchley’s argument speaks about something slightly different, specifically, about the conditions for something to be understood as a joke or be funny, not about who can tell a joke, however, in our case the latter also applies because if Slobodanka, as she herself stated it, would be a joke-teller the joke would have been accepted well.23 Even Bosnians who left the city during the siege were to some extent unwelcomed to participate in a war-related humor when they came back after the war. The congruence between social structure and joke structure is essential for the humor to be seen as humor. In 2017 the Economist published an article "Bosnia's stand-ups jest about genocide."24 The journalist came to Sarajevo to collect material about standup scene of the city, but also demonstrated an interest in the siege humor. One of the local standup comedians, Navid Balbulija, shared some war-related jokes but regretted it when the article was published. The article starts with the joke about the widow who was asked to identify her husband’s body: “The problem is that the mass grave that’s been excavated only contained the men’s lower halves. The woman is led from body bag to body bag and presented with the remains in each. ‘That’s not him. That’s not him. That’s not him,’ she says. ‘And this guy’s not even from Srebrenica!’”25 The article became a matter of controversy in Bosnia as the information provided in the article is misleading. It is true that humor played a huge role during the wars of the 1990s in Bosnia, including jokes about the most horrible events, such as about the genocide in Srebrenica. However, it is not true that Navid mentioned Srebrenica in the joke. I've interviewed Navid, who was mentioned in the article as the author of the joke, and have a full account of what he actually said and meant. An actual joke goes this way: “Fata is asked to recognize Mujo. The problem is that there were only the men's lower halves. She goes 'he is not my husband, he is not, this one is not from our village.’” If the joke was written in the article in this way it would not raise that much concern among Bosnians. By retelling a joke in a different way author of the article has left aside the congruence between the structures, and the joke lost its identity. Fata and Mujo are fictional characters of most jokes in Bosnia, these names refer to the Muslim identity of the characters as well as to Bosnian Muslims in general. These two stand for Fatima and Muhammed, traditional Muslim names, there are also Suljo and Haso, which stand for Sulejman and Hassan. Names had to be mentioned, not simply 'woman' and ‘husband’. In the local jokes about these characters, usually, when Fata is involved it would be about infidelity, and when there are Mujo and Suljo only, it would be about some foolish act that one of them has committed. Srebrenica is assumed here, but it cannot be mentioned, same as body bags.
22 Critchley, On Humor. 23 Critchley, On Humor. 24 No Author, “Bosnia’s Stand-Ups Jest about Genocide.” The Economist, 17 October, 2017, https://www.economist.com/prospero/2017/10/17/bosnias-stand-ups-jest-about-genocide. 25 Ibid. There have to be some limits, and Srebrenica is that line that cannot be crossed, like the Holocaust in Jewish humor. It can be assumed but not stated directly. It should be noticed, that still the joke may be perceived by many Bosnians as very inappropriate and immoral. There can be no unified consensus in terms of humor appreciation. A recently developed theory of benign violations, for instance, holds that “laughter and amusement result from violations that are simultaneously seen as benign.”26 What some people may perceive as benign others may view as non-benign and thus humor may turn out as inappropriate in the latter case, but here it is clear that a joke is more acceptable when it follows the norms and rules of humor that are in play in a specific cultural setting. The joke itself, apart from the topic of infidelity, highlights the self-directed humor of Bosnians, they choose to make fun of themselves rather than of others. This joke is a perfect example as targets Bosnians (Fata’s infidelity) rather than the ones who have committed atrocities in Srebrenica. It may raise moral concerns among outsiders, but within the victimized group of Bosnians, it was a normal practice. I have discussed this joke with lots of people in Sarajevo and most of them would tell me similar ones in response, rather than get offended, but the way it was discussed in the article certainly raised controversy at the time it was published. As Navid mentioned in the interview:
It was a case of an economy of the Economist. It was really a big problem at the time. It is a war time joke, actually I’ve heard it after the war, after they started excavating the graves. The point is, Bosnians all tell these jokes, after the article was published everyone asked me what was the joke about, because no one really read it. And when I tell them, they would reply ‘I have another one’. The problem was that, if you tell it with Mujo and Fata, it is not a joke about Srebrenica, it is about Bosnian culture. It is about humanity, anywhere else it could happen. The point was that he put Srebrenica into the spotlight. I also tried to explain him that we make jokes about catastrophes, tragic things, to better cope, but it all just got lost in the article.27
The discussed jokes about necessity and infidelity, if not universal, at least exist in many societies, such as in the region my origin jokes about wives, husbands and infidelity are quite popular. At the same time such universal topics of humor may be put into a specific cultural setting, as it was demonstrated. Jokes may point out local practices and provide information about the culture. While similar jokes further will be later elaborated more deeply, in the meantime they help to figure out the relationship between universal and contextual nature of humor, which is complicated, it may be both at the same time. Slavoj Žižek claimed that jokes have no authors: “crucial feature of jokes is that they never seem to have an author, as if the question “who is the author of this joke?” were an impossible one.”28 The same kind of jokes can be witnessed in various cultures, such as about fools, lazy or cheap people, etc. I myself have heard the same joke about a Bosnian emigrant who is hired in some country abroad and told by an employer – ‘Oh, you are Bosnian, I know you are lazy’, and the Bosnian replies – ‘no, those are Montenegrins, we are stupid.’ Every time the joke was personalized, as if the teller knew it from personal experience and it is about his or her friend, or even about famous Bosnian football manager who got hired in Japan. While jokes are discussed here, it has to be mentioned that the current research is about humor, and these two are not necessarily the same although have an associative link. Jokes are almost always considered as forms of humor, but in this work humor is mostly considered as
26 McGraw, A.P. and Warren, C. 2009. “Benign Violations: Making Immoral Behavior Funny”, Psychological Science, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1141-1149. 27 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with N. Balbuja. 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 28 Slavoj Žižek. 2014. Žižek’s Jokes. Cambridge: The MIT Press. an attitude. Bosnians’ ability to tell jokes in extreme situations is a humorous attitude in itself. The abovementioned jokes provide a good introduction to a local humor culture. Further, it will be discussed why such jokes were widespread during the siege. Before answering this questions, a literature review of the humor studies has to be presented.
Humor Studies
There are three major theories of humor: superiority, relief, and incongruity. The first one is founded on the ideas of Plato and Thomas Hobbes. Plato’s contribution to humor lies primarily in the Republic and the Philebus, in both he characterizes humor as negative. In the former, Plato claims that laughter is not recommended to the Guardians as when we laugh we lose control over ourselves: “They must not be prone to laughter. For ordinarily when one abandons himself to violent laughter his condition provokes a violent reaction.”29 In the latter, Plato elaborates more on why specifically humor is a malice.30 Plato claims that a malice constitutes itself in pleasures at the misfortunes of others, and the nature of what we usually ridicule lies in the misfortunes of others, more specifically, in people’s ignorance, when they assume that they are richer, physically stronger, or smarter than they actually are.31 “Do we enjoy laughing at it, or does it distress us?” – asks Plato – “But didn't we say that it was malice that produced pleasure at the shortcomings of our friends?”32 In his monumental work Leviathan, Hobbes regarded humor as something negative as well, because jokes contain malice in relation to the ones they are targeted at. Philosopher’s perception of humor is founded on his understanding of human nature. Hobbes argued that humans are naturally competitive creatures, which implies that we either lose or win.33 Loss is miserable and sad, victory, on the contrary, is joyful. So, when our realization of superiority comes to us in a process of winning laughter breaks out, it is a moment of sudden glory.34 According to Hobbes, laughter out of sudden glory is not only produced when we are winning, but also when we feel that we are superior to others. The theory is widely criticized. Its focus on inferiority of others is insufficient to explain all kinds of humor. Bob Plant states that if the theory was valid we could simply go to hospital and laugh at sick people, which we obviously do not do.35 Francis Hutcheson argued that if the theory is right than we would not laugh without comparison of ourselves to others, and that we would laugh in every case when we feel superior; both cases are misleading.36 We laugh without implementation of comparison, as we laugh at ourselves and in situations not involving other individuals. Superiority theory of humor does not explain cases when people engage in self-mocking or laugh at others’ superior qualities, which we often do, as in the case of Charlie Chaplin’s characters’ acrobatic abilities. Despite the critique superiority theory attracts it is still useful for the current case of study as some examples of humor that is going to be discussed may be well explained by this theory. The second major theory of humor is relief theory and its main contributor is Sigmund Freud with his book Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious and several related articles. According to Freud humor is a permissible expression of unconscious impulses, that would
29 Plato. 1997. The Republic. In Cooper, J.M. and Hutchinson, D.S. (Ed.), Complete Works. Indianapolis: Huckett Publishing Company. 30 Plato. 1997. The Philebus. In Cooper, J.M. and Hutchinson, D.S. (Ed.), Complete Works. Indianapolis: Huckett Publishing Company. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Thomas Hobbes. 1985. Leviathan. London: Penguin Classics. 34 Ibid. 35 Plant, B. 2009. “Absurdity, Incongruity and Laughter”, Philosophy, vol. 84, no. 327, pp. 111-134. 36 John Morreall. 2009. Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. otherwise be not acceptable, specifically sexual and aggressive urges.37 Laughter, Freud argues, releases the energy that was gathered to perform some psychological task but became unnecessary as the task was withdrawn.38 Freud views laughter as an expression of repressed feelings. Definitely, we do not laugh only in cases when we repress sexual desires or aggression, but some empirical studies show that these two urges are the most frequent forms of humor, it was found that intellectual, social and self-defense forms of humor are less frequent.39 However, such findings should be re-evaluated, results may vary depending on the context where humor takes place, as it is situational and responsive to the context. For instance, Chaya Osrower’s study illustrates that the most frequent form of humor in the Auschwitz concentration camp was self-mocking as a mechanism of self-defense, it could also be the case in Bosnia, especially under the siege of Sarajevo.40 However, self-mocking humor as a mechanism of self-defense may also be explained by the relief theory. Humor, according to Freud is liberating, there is also something of grandeur and elevation in humor, it allows ego to be invulnerable.41 The ego has a potential to refuse accepting stressful situations through humor, what may be called as coping mechanism. Same as in case of humor out of superiority, relief theory does not explain all types of humor, but it is still relevant and contemporary scholars, such as Simon Critchley, often refer to Freud’s ideas while explaining humor and laughter, specifically humor’s potential to change the situation, what implies a move from seriousness to non-seriousness or from objective to hypothetical reality; what is probably one of humor’s crucial functions in non-humorous situations, such as in Sarajevo during its siege.42 The last major theory of humor is the incongruity theory. It holds that out of our experience we have some expectations regarding what is going to happen or is going to be said, and humor emerges when reality does not meet these expectations. So, when our perceptions or expectations are not met due to incongruity we start to laugh, we do not expect someone to fall in front of us on the street, but when it happens it’s difficult to hold in the laughter. The ‘gas/Auschwitz’ joke may be well explained by the theory. ‘How Auschwitz was better than Sarajevo’ is the setting, it creates expectations, we may assume that there was actually something better in Auschwitz than in Sarajevo. ‘At least there was gas’ is an incongruous punchline that violates our expectations, it is what we did not expect to hear. Before the theory was classified in the 20th century it has been developing over centuries by the Western philosophers, such as Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Kant, among others. Chronologically, the first to be mentioned is Cicero who viewed laughter as a product of unmet expectations, he stated: “The most common kind of joke is that in which we expect one thing and another is said, here our own disappointed expectation makes us laugh.”43 Immanuel Kant held similar position – “In everything that is to excite a lively convulsive laugh there must be something absurd, in which the understanding, therefore, can find no satisfaction. Laughter is an affection arising from the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing.”44 James Beattie was the first to mention the term ‘incongruity’ while referring to laughter – “It seems to arise from the view of things incongruous united in the same assemblage.”45 And he was followed by Arthur Schopenhauer – “The cause of laughter in every case is simply the sudden perception of the incongruity between a concept and the real objects which have been thought through it
37 Sigmund Freud. 1990. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 38 Ibid. 39 Avner Ziv. 1984. Personality and Sense of Humor. New York: Springer Publishing Company. 40 Ostrower, “Humor as Defense Mechanism during the Holocaust.” 41 Freud, S. 1927. "Der Humor." Passage 34 (2000): 18-21. 42 Critchley, On Humor. 43 Ibid. 44 Morreall, Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. 45 Ibid. in some relation, and laughter itself is just the expression of this incongruity.”46 Soren Kierkegaard preferred the term ‘contradiction’ instead of ‘incongruity’.47 At present, there is much consensus among scholars that incongruity theory is the best one in terms of explaining humor, and new theories are mostly found on the ideas of incongruity theory of humor, such as the earlier mentioned theory of benign violations, for example. Such chronological classification of humor in relation to philosophers’ works became a tendency. These classical theories of humor are at the core of humor studies, nevertheless none of these can explain all cases of humor and laughter, and thus all three should be equally considered while discussing the case of Bosnian humor.
Stereotypes about Bosnians
In academic literature one the most frequent terms used in relation to humor and laughter is ubiquitous. It is a fair characterization, both humor and laughter exist in all societies. The attitudes towards these two may be positive or negative, depending on cultural norms, and thus the prevalence of both phenomena varies from culture to culture. However, all humans are capable of laughing and producing or appreciating humor. Due to this fact since the early stages of the research I felt an urgent need to justify the choice of the case. Humor exists both in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the country of my origin, then why do I choose to travel far away, spending the school’s resources, when I could conduct a research on humor back home. Nevertheless, since the first days in the field I realized that the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina represents a special case. It is not unique as some sort of uniqueness of humor is present in every society. In Kazakhstan, where I am from, local humor has some distinctive cultural traits as well, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina humor is a part of culture, as well as of people’s identity. Bosnians believe that their humor is special and plays a crucial role in their daily lives. Almost every participant of the study has expressed agreement concerning the importance of humor for the local community and Bosnians’ special talent in telling jokes, such as “our culture is rooted in irony and sarcasm,” “we are funny and make jokes easily, we are quick in humor,” “humor is a way of life, something that connects dots in our everyday life events,” “we were good in telling jokes forever.”48 On the contrary, in Kazakhstan people would question my choice of study, at least I would be surprised if some researcher approached me with a request to participate in a study about Kazakh humor, I would not have much to say about it. In Bosnia, on the contrary, people can talk about their humor for hours, what I witnessed while conducting interviews. To collect information I decided to conduct semi-structured interviews but the first ones were the least successful as I was too much focused on the questions outlined in an interview guide and it distracted from the conversations. I then decided to start the interviews with a very broad question – “could you please inform me about Bosnian humor” – and the participants would go on talking about it non-stop. From time-to-time I would intervene to introduce some topics as identity, siege, etc., to lead the discussion in the directions I was more interested in. Not surprisingly, the first few interviews lasted on average thirty minutes, while the later ones from sixty to ninety minutes. The single fact that people in Bosnia have so much to say about their humor already points to its importance in their lives. To be honest, some participants denied the idea that Bosnian humor is somehow special, but agreed that it plays a significant role in their culture.
46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. 48 Orlov, D. 2019. Interviews with Camo, Lenard, Zekic, Bosankic. Summer 2019, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. By the end of the second fieldwork I was left with an abundant information about history of Bosnia and Herzegovina, life in socialist times, wars the country has gone through during the 20th century, siege of Sarajevo, genocide in Srebrenica, immigration and current socio- political issues. All this information was received through talking about humor. An abundance of the collected data and numerous topics it touched upon became a problem at some point of the research but also led me to an important conclusion – humor is a significantly useful heuristic. The initial interest in the war-related humor was grounded in my ignorance of humor studies. Numerous researchers and journalists have been similarly attracted by seemingly abnormal and incongruent jokes form war time Bosnia, such as the ones about Auschwitz or Srebrenica. While this research still pays a lot of attention to war and siege humor, I will further argue that this focus may be misleading because these events have only made local humor more visible to the outside world, but in fact it is rooted much deeper. To begin with, humor is a widely discussed topic in the former Yugoslavia, not just in Bosnia and Herzegovina; there are constant debates and comparisons. Who is funny and who is not, or who is the most or the least funny in the region? The region is constituted of six former Yugoslav republics: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia. It should be mentioned that when we talk about Bosnian humor we consider all ethnic groups living in this multiethnic state, specifically, its three major groups – Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims), Croats and Serbs. Everyone who lives in Bosnia is assumed to have a good sense of humor, including Croats, but Croats from Croatia are considered as the least funny in the region. For instance, a local university professor of psychology Nina Bosankic was the first who introduced me to this stereotype: “I don’t know if you know, the Croats don’t have humor. There is a Croatian comedy, but they have only a few good movies. But generally speaking, who watches that?”49 Similarly, a stand-up comedian from Mostar Omer Hodžić continued this thought: “The way they act, they need to vocalize it, they cannot act their feelings, they need to say it ‘my son died, I feel so bad’. In ex-Yugoslavia, Zagreb and Croatia are viewed as the least funny.”50 Omer has concluded that despite awareness of the fact that these are stereotypes, although he has earlier expressed genuine feelings about Croatian comedies and cinema in general, it is often difficult for him to explain to the local public that a stand-up comedian coming from Zagreb to perform in Bosnia can be funny. Serbs, on the contrary, both from Bosnia and Serbia are famous for their good sense of humor, as well as Montenegrins, but Slovenes are in a competition with Croats. For some reason Macedonians are excluded from this discourse, however, the reasons explaining it are beyond the scope of this research. In general, the above-mentioned scales of funniness and assumptions regarding who has or does not have a good sense of humor are rooted in local stereotypes. Gordon W. Allport, in The Nature of Prejudice, has claimed that stereotypes may be either totally unsupported or derived from exaggerations.51 The origins of stereotypes may be dubious or misrepresentative, but when they are in place they play an important role in the way members belonging to them behave and perceive themselves as well as others. In the case of the former Yugoslavia, stereotypes are widespread. Most importantly, within the context of current research, stereotypes and humor are tightly connected. The degree of acceptance of these stereotypes among members of various groups varies, but they exist and everyone is aware of them. The most famous ones are about Bosnians and Montenegrins, the former are perceived as stupid and the latter as lazy. Lots of jokes are about these two ethnic groups, such as this one: “Why did the Montenegrin become so lazy? Because the Bosnian once said to him: “Let me
49 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with N. Bosankic. 4 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 50 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with O. Hodzic. 20 July, Mostar, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 51 Gordon, W. Allport. 1958. The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Addison-Wesley. explain...”52 Both Slovenes and Croats are regarded as boring and trying too hard to be European. Also, Slovenes are stereotyped as stingy and Croats as overly religious. Serbs are viewed as militant, savage or farmers, although participants of this research have not expressed a general and widely accepted stereotype about Serbs. In the jokes Serbs are mocked for trying too hard to be superior, for example, such jokes as ‘from Belgrade to Tokyo’ or ‘Serbs were there before the amoebas’.53 Also, in the case of every nation group there are regional stereotypes, but it is beyond the scope of this research. It is easy to observe these stereotypes in daily life as well, not just in jokes. One of the participants of the research, a Sarajevan stand-up comedian, also working as a tour guide, told a story about one of the tours he conducted: “Once, I had guy from Slovenia in a group, and I was talking about the local stereotypes, like Montenegrins are lazy, we are stupid, and Slovenes are stingy. In the end, the guy from Slovenia gave me fifty marks, around twenty-five euro as a tip, which is huge. It was like ‘we are not stingy anymore but you are still stupid’. No, we are not even stupid now, actually you are stupid.”54 While some of the above-mentioned stereotypes may be refuted by the ones to whom those are ascribed, Bosnians accept them well. Stereotypically, Bosnians are both funny and stupid. Pjer Žalica, a prominent Bosnian movie director, in the interview assumed the connection between the two: “I suppose that we are the funny ones in the jokes and also we are the stupid ones. I think that the notion that we are funny comes also from there.”55
Origins of stereotypes and self-directed humor
In terms of the targets of laughter, it can be directed either at yourself or at someone else. In his essay Humor, for example, Sigmund Freud states that a humorous attitude refers either towards other or self.56 Simon Critchley, a contemporary English philosopher, explains how humor may be directed at the latter. He follows Austrian psychoanalyst’s thought by claiming that we both have bodies and are our bodies.57 When we laugh at ourselves we occupy an alienated position in relation to our body, the subject becomes an object so that the object of laughter is the subject who laughs.58 Although ethnic humor can be directed both at the in- group and out-group members this research paper focuses mostly on the former case because Bosnian humor is traditionally self-directed. Uğur Ümit Üngör and Valerie Amandine Verkerke state: “Bosnian humor was especially known for its self-mocking character.”59 Similarly, Nihad Kreševljaković mentions it as a distinctive feature of Bosnian humor: “It is different because of its self-criticism, it does not ridicule others but instead, its main characters laugh at themselves.”60 Srdjan Vucetic claims that “According to the unwritten common wisdom on ex-Yugoslav humor, it is Bosnians themselves who create these jokes.”61 He further asks himself a question – “But why is the Bosnian dumber than others? Why do I tell a joke in which my people turn out to be dumb?”62 Almost every single participant of the research has asked him or herself this question during our discussions. The most common one was that it is
52 Vucetic, “Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia”. 53 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with F. Andronic. 14 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 54 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with N. Balbuja. 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 55 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with P. Žalica. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 56 Freud, "Der Humor." 57 Critchley, On Humor. 58 Ibid. 59 Üngör, U. Ü. and Verkerke, V.A. 2015, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide”, European Journal of Humor Research, vol. 3, no. 2/3, pp. 80–101. 60 Kreševljaković, “Humor under siege: Mujo, don't jump around, you'll get hungry.” 61 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 62 Ibid. a way of coping and rising above the situation. However, it is still interesting why this specific self-humiliating strategy was collectively employed. Üngör and Verkerke argue that some groups, such as European Jews, for example, assign negative stereotypical qualities to themselves, the case of Bosnian humor represents a similar phenomenon.63 However, although they assign such negative properties to themselves, it is yet not clear if those were initially ascribed by the Jews and Bosnians to themselves, or were assigned by outsiders and later internalized. Intuitively, it sounds unlikely that an ethnic group may voluntarily choose to assume itself to be the fool in the region. Three questions are going to be discussed in this section: (1) What are the origins of the stereotype that Bosnians are stupid? (2) What is the relationship between this stereotype and humor? (3) Why having obtained a reputation for being funny, one would continue with negative stereotypes? Srdjan Vucetic argues that jokes are about identities and identities are about jokes.64 Following this argument, as long as most of the jokes in the former Yugoslavia are about stereotypes, we can conclude that stereotypes are also related to the local identities. It is true that stereotypes may be found on prejudices and exaggerations, but when they are formed, we need to pay attention to them. In the case of Bosnia, as well as other nation states in the region, the earlier mentioned stereotypes are deeply rooted in people’s memory, culture, and folklore. So, what are the origins of stereotypes about Bosnians and how are they related to self-directed humor? The stereotype of stupid, fool or dumb group is one of the most widespread in the world. Christie Davies, one of the most influential scholars in the field of study of ethnic humor, in the book Jokes and their Relation to Society, has concluded that in almost every single society around the world there is a group that is targeted as stupid.65 It may be difficult to trace them back to the time when they were formed. For example, in Egypt at the present-day Nubians are targeted as fools and the origin of this stereotype comes from a script that is older than one thousand years, but still we cannot be sure about it completely, probably the script just recapitulated previously existing stereotypes.66 An interesting finding on the subject is that most of the presumably stupid groups have adopted this stereotype. Davies points out that Scots, Jews, Newfoundlanders and Australians among others, are famous for self-ridicule, specifically, for jokes about their presumed foolishness.67 Christie Davies argues that certain characteristics are ascribed to groups living at the margins of a particular society – the peripheral groups.68 Numerous groups may be included in this category, such as immigrants, the poor, and rural. Ethnic jokes usually imply polar opposites – rich and poor, city residents and the rural inhabitants, original residents and the newly arriving immigrants. Those ones who are characterized by the former make fun of those who belong to the latter. In most of the cases the latter group is considered as suspicious, poorer, having a backward infrastructure, low access to schools, they have strange cuisine. These backward characteristics serve the ground for jokes about stupidity.69 Davies argues that jokes about stupidity are ascribed by the joke tellers to the groups living at the edge of their social universe: “When people define who they are in terms of their membership of a local community, then they will tell jokes about the stupidity of the people of some other local community, defining who they are not in terms of a social unit similar to the one which gives
63 Üngör and Verkerke, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide.” 64 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 65 Christie Davies. 1998. Jokes and their relation to society. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid. 69 Ibid. them their basic identity.”70 Bosnia and Herzegovina within the former Yugoslavia region represents the case of a society at the margin or the edge. Other nation groups, such as Croats, Slovene, or Serbs have a history of statehood, Montenegrins are proud of their opposition to the Ottoman conquests, Macedonians similarly derive some degree of pride in history. Bosnia and Herzegovina, on the other hand, has always been governed and has no prior history of statehood. Participants of this study have often characterized Bosnia as an orphan or a child whom other groups try to take care of. Infrastructural and geographic backwardness has also been expressed: “Resources have been centered in Belgrade and Zagreb, as the major cities of the country, Slovenia has always been the more European among us, we were far away from the biggest cities or the sea.”71 As Raskin and Ruch argue, “If the sense of superiority to one's rival is or was buttressed by the recognized advantages that a community on the main routes of transport and trade has over a more remote community at the periphery, or that an urban center has over its rural hinterland, then jokes about the alleged stupidity of the latter are likely to emerge.”72 My classification of Bosnians as a historical peripheral group may be criticized for not placing it within a historical context and emphasizing only what participants have expressed. It is true that during the Ottoman period Sarajevo was a major city within the Balkans, and probably had much more advantages than Zagreb, for example. Memory may often be inaccurate and during the interviews none of the participants has pointed out that Sarajevo actually was comparatively advantageous during the Ottoman rule. However, now it is not important whether the current memory of Bosnians corresponds to historical reality, because it is the memory Bosnians have now that shapes the way they perceive themselves and their humor, not the historical accuracy. Additionally, following existing literature about groups stereotyped as stupid, the ones who are targeted as stupid are peripheral groups in almost all societies around the world and if this conclusion is valid, as long as it is Bosnians in the Balkans who are stereotyped as stupid, it already implies that they were a peripheral group. As it was already mentioned, stereotypes may be found on false grounds or exaggerations, but when people have internalized a stereotype—even a false or inaccurate one— that will still affect how they think of themselves and their relationship with humor. That will also affect how comedians craft their humor for their audiences. The set-up for many comedy routines involves framing the performer as a marginalized figure, even when this performer may not, or may no longer be, all that marginalized. At the present date Bosnia and Herzegovina is an independent state, it is not a periphery in relation to some center, but still the stereotype of stupid groups is present in the discourse and jokes specifically. In Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor, Leon Rappoport, drawing on philosophy and modern psychology, argues that presence of ethnic humor comes from the need to cope with the risky nature of interpersonal relations.73 He derives this conclusion from the fact that anyone who is seemingly different from us may be perceived as a potential threat. Nevertheless, in the former Yugoslavia, while certainly having some differences, all of the nation groups had a lot in common. Alternatively, Raskin and Ruch suggest that fear of interpersonal relations can be better expressed among similar groups, and thus the need of differentiation among them emerge.74 It can be seen in ethnic jokes: “In traditional societies, where people derive one of their most important social identities from their membership of a local community, the jokes are told about the members of a group that
70 Ibid. 71 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S. Lizdek. 10 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 72 Davies, Jokes and their relation to society. 73 Leon Rappoport. 2005. Punchlines: The Cace for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. Westport: Praeger Publishers. 74 Davies, Jokes and their relation to society. is recognizably similar and who, to the joke-tellers look like themselves as seen in a distorting mirror.”75 French jokes about stupidity refer to Belgians not to Austrians, for example, as the former are more similar to them than the latter, as well geographically closer, what to a certain extent also implies similarity. Similarly, in England people ascribe stupidity to the Scots, not to the traditional enemy, the French. The need for self-identification through stereotypes arises in societies where similar groups live together, not the other way around. Stereotypes presented in jokes can function as boundaries for the creation of social identities. In Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach, Mahadev Apte points out jokes’ usefulness in defining as well as redefining the borders between groups and in creating us-and-them dichotomy.76 Vucetic claims that ethnic jokes fit Eric Hobsbawm’s definition of invented traditions because they also may “socialize or inculcate beliefs, values, or behaviors.”77 In ethnic jokes we differentiate us form them by telling who is arrogant, stupid, lazy, rich, among other characteristics. Slobodanka Lizdek, one of the participants of this study, tried to explain stereotypes ascribed to Bosnians or by Bosnians through stereotypical oppositions: “Bosnians are not known as people who work a lot, Slovenians are hardworking. They are not the most beautiful because the others are perhaps more beautiful than Bosnians. They are not the tallest, those are Montenegrins. So, they really tried their way to impose themselves and I think that humor was something that was completely natural.”78 Slobodanka has not mentioned ascribed identity of a fool, but in general, Bosnian humor implies it. Also, she assumes that stereotypes are self-imposed, while the earlier theoretical framework illustrates that they are appointed, and as Davies has shown, are well accepted by the groups at the periphery and further reinforced in self-ridicule. Ethnic humor initiated by the joke tellers towards groups at the margins can be well explained by the superiority theory of humor. Rappoport argues that humor is mostly directed downward, those having more power tell jokes in relation to the ones with less power.79 Military officer, boss or supervisor find it easy to tell jokes directed at those occupying inferior position in the status hierarchy, while the latter rarely initiate jokes in the opposite direction.80 The same, he argues, can be applied to inter-ethnic relations, where an ethnic group with a higher status ridicules the one with the lower status: “In the Old South, whites might initiate humor with blacks, but blacks who ‘knew their place’ would hardly ever do this with whites.”81 Together with Jews in Europe, African Americans represent one of the most studied cases on this subject, Boskin and Dorinson argue that white Protestant majority in the U.S. produced ethnic humor directed at the black slaves, and later at immigrants, as a “function of social class feelings of superiority and white racial antagonisms.”82 This kind of humor “expresses the continuing resistance of advantaged groups to unrestrained immigration and to emancipation's black subcitizens barred from opportunities for participation and productivity.”83 Raskin and Ruch argue that the joke producing majority enjoys a “sudden burst of glory,” what is at the core of Hobbes’ theory, by ridiculing a similar but presumably inferior group.84
75 Ibid. 76 Mahadev L. Apte. 1985. Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. New York: Cornell University Press. 77 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 78 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S. Lizdek. 10 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 79 Rappoport, Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid. 82 Boskin, J. and Dorinson, J. 1985, “Ethnic Humor: Subversion and Survival”, American Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 81-97. 83 Ibid. 84 Davies, Jokes and their relation to society. Almost in every case the group that is stereotyped as stupid represents the peripheral group within the larger society, it implies that there is a majority or dominant group. The goal of this group, when they ridicule and ascribe negative stereotypes to peripheral groups is to preserve the status quo, why then do the latter accept these stereotypes? Existing studies of intergroup humor in societies having a majority-minority division have shown that the minority groups produce more jokes and humor in general than the majority. 85 Also, mostly the jokes are self-directed, as well as self-deprecating. Ethnic humor directed at the minority, or peripheral groups in the case under study, is well explained by the superiority theory, but how can it explain the fact that minorities accept it and direct it at themselves? Scruton argues that we do not like being ridiculed because it decreases our value in the eyes of the joke teller, it implies superiority of majority group over the minority group.86 Self-directed ridicule, derived from humiliating characteristics ascribed by an outsider, seemingly goes against Scruton’s assumption. Some argue that ethnic humor may be pleasurable, even for those at whom it is directed, because it does not ridicule the target as an ethnic group, but only its distinctive features. For example, Arthur Asa Berger, in An Anatomy of Humor, suggests an example of Irishmen, who are ridiculed for their culture of drinking, but not because they are Irish per se.87 Such perspective looks like an excuse for ethnic humor, however, it does not explain the pleasure that the targeted group supposedly experiences in self-ridicule. On the contrary, especially for groups ridiculed for presumed stupidity, such an explanation is humiliating. Following Berger’s logic, “Stupid Bosnian” is not a nationalistic joke, as if it is not a joke about Bosnians because they are Bosnians per se, but just because they are stupid. Such an approach legitimizes the stereotypes. Obviously, to claim that Bosnians are stupid is nationalistic, and Bosnians would accept it as actually true. The fact that most of the minority groups ridiculed for presumed stupidity have accepted this negative characteristic implies that they find some usefulness and pleasure in it. The pleasure principle is at the center of Freud’s understanding of humor: “Humor is not resigned; it is rebellious. It signifies not only the triumph of the ego but also of the pleasure principle, which is able here to assert itself against the unkindness of the real circumstances.”88 Or, in Phillip Glenn’s words, it creates a situation of nonseriousness that brings in a positive effect.89 One of the participants of this research stated: “Everybody else was making fun of Bosnians, and we said ok, if you make fun of us, let us show how it is done. You can fight them but it is not useful. Basically we embraced those stereotypes about Bosnians, that we are sometimes stupid, really simple people, who want to eat, drink and have sex, we don’t have any desires aside from that. In that way everybody else cannot make worse jokes about you than you can do about yourself.”90 The frequency of humor, especially self- directed one, observed among minority groups lies not simply in the status of minority, but also in the fact that minorities suffer a lot, go through the difficulties, are oppressed and stigmatized. It should be mentioned that Bosnians are not a minority group, but a peripheral one, however, peripheral groups have similar disadvantages as the minority, and participants of the research have all concluded that Bosnians suffered the most. In humor they fight back and restore their dignity. The pleasure principle lies within this struggle, when they rise above the situation. Leon Rappoport uses a metaphor of ‘sword and shield’ to explain the different
85 Nevo, O. 1984, “Appreciation and Production of Humor as an Expression of Aggression: A Study of Jews and Arabs in Israel.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp, 181-98. 86 Scruton, “Laughter”. 87 Arthur A. Berger. 1993. An anatomy of humor. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. 88 Freud, "Der Humor." 89 Philip Glenn. 2003. Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 90 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with D.N. Catovic. 14 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. goals of ethnic humor for majority and minority groups.91 Both groups use it for different reasons depending on the goals they strive to achieve. The former, strive to preserve the status- quo, as they are in the privileged position. Conversely, the latter, are unsatisfied by the existing status hierarchy and struggle to change it. As Scruton argues, we do not like being ridiculed, and when the oppressor, in our case a dominant group in a society, targets members of the minority group in their jokes, they may feel humiliated and experience a loss of dignity. Self- directed humor is a tool to restore it. Most of us have been ridiculed for the distinctive characteristics we possess. It could be a big nose, the way we talk, or it could be anything else. The best way to stop being ridiculed by outsiders is to join. Almost every participant of this research has linked the prevalence of humor in Bosnia to the long-lasting tradition of suffering. Pjer Žalica in the interview, has pointed out that Bosnians have a good sense of humor because they suffered a lot throughout history. Others mentioned that the word Sarajevo itself implies some heaviness.92 According to the participants of this research, Bosnia and Sarajevo has always been hit the hardest in all wars throughout history. Humor has become a natural coping mechanism that they use to cope with daily hardships and consequently it became an inseparable part of their culture. It is true that other groups, such as Serbs, for instance, could say the same for themselves, but still they were in a relatively dominant position historically, having the strongest army, military successes, as well as power and resources were mainly concentrated in Belgrade. Leon Rappoport draws the same conclusion as I do in this research, Jews, African- American and Bosnians became good in humor because they have suffered the most, were ridiculed and stereotyped. What Bosnians did is they accepted it as a tool to fight back and to restore their dignity. By accepting the assigned stereotypes, as Philip Glenn calls it, Bosnians have achieved a transformation from laughing at to laughing with: “Willingness to go along with, or even initiate, laughter at oneself provides potential payoffs in realigning towards affiliation. Once laughing at either is underway or relevant, willingness to laugh at self provides a resource for converting the environment to laughing with.”93 Glenn argues that this transformation allows to change the social structure.94 Glenn provides an extract from Dick Gregory’s, a professional comedian, autobiography to make the point:
I got picked on a lot around the neighborhood. I’d just get mad and run home and cry when the kids started. And then, I don’t know just when, I started to figure it out. They were going to laugh anyway, but if I made the jokes they’d laugh with me instead of at me. I’d get the kids off my back, on my side. Before they could get going, I’d knock it out first, fast, knock out those jokes so they wouldn’t have time to set and climb all over me. And they started to come over and listen to me, they’d see me coming and crowd around me on the corner.95
Gregory’s experience is very similar to what participants of this study alluded in the interviews, such as “if you make fun of us, let us show how it is done.”96 By accepting the stereotype of funny fools Bosnians have achieved the transformation mentioned by Glenn. In theories mentioned earlier the origins of stereotypes about the stupid group is explained through the risky nature of inter-group relations and assumed backwardness of the targeted group. However, by the transformation from laughing at to laughing with Bosnians have created a
91 Rappoport, Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. 92 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with A.B. Camo. 24 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 93 Glenn, Laughter in Interaction. 94 Ibid. 95 Ibid. 96 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with D.N. Catovic. 14 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. positive self-image. Archetypical fool is actually perceived as a smart figure of fun and as Daniels and Daniels argue has a ‘licensed freedom’.97 People admire the fool’s ability to get away with what he tells in the jokes and the readiness to be target of laughter.98 Leon Rappoport argues that stereotypes are not primarily about prejudices, but about a sense of pride that minorities see in it.99 This sense of pride is rooted in the ability of minority and peripheral groups to come out on top in ethnic jokes, which is also related to the principle of pleasure. In the jokes they themselves make, Bosnians come out on top, both in the jokes’ structure and in the fact that it is the Bosnians themselves who tell these jokes. Most of the jokes have a similar structure, the first part of the joke represents a setting, and the last provides a punchline which is constituted in an incongruent relationship to the setting. The punchline is an alternative absurd reality that has something to say about an actual world.100 According to Vucetic, in an ethnic joke a narrator positions himself in relation to other groups within a certain social environment.101 Despite the fact that various ethnic groups are present in the joke, the one that is placed in the punchline is stressed, while superior characteristics of the groups in the setting remain obscure and less important.
A Montenegrin, a Serb and a Bosnian come to the railway station. Once they arrive, they realize that the train is leaving. They start running: the Montenegrin gives up immediately, the Serb shortly afterwards, only the Bosnian manages to hop on the train and leave. The Montenegrin and the Serb return looking somewhat discontented. A person who observed it all asks them: “How is it that the Bosnian got on, and you didn’t?” – “Oh, that guy?! The fool was only supposed to take us to the station.”102
In most of the similar jokes as the one above there are several groups from the former Yugoslavia presented. The first two do something properly or fail to perform some activity, and then the Bosnian does something stupid. However, a Bosnian is in a way triumphant in his stupidity. The punchline is a crucial part of the joke, without it the setting represents just some made-up or real facts. The regional jokes are almost impossible without a triumphant Bosnian character. By producing similar jokes Bosnians create a discourse in which it is they who are stressed, not others. In this way in the structure of the jokes they come out on top. What is also important is that it is the Bosnians who tell jokes about themselves. While portraying themselves as stupid in jokes they actually see themselves as smart and witty. The wit is not necessarily in the events of the plot but in the means of telling the story. In other words, the joke teller comes out on top, even if one of his co-nationals is made to look buffoonish in the plot of the joke. The triumph is derived from the context – that the teller is Bosnian means that the joke-teller is witty enough to score a laugh; he is self-conscious enough to recognize how outsiders view him. Neil Norrick, an expert in conversational laughter, argues that self-deprecating humor serves the function of presenting oneself in a positive way: “Funny personal anecdotes end up presenting a positive self-image rather than a negative one. They convey a so-called sense of humor, which counts as a virtue in our society. They present a self with an ability to laugh at
97 Daniels, A. K. and Daniels, R. R. 1964. “The social functions of the career fool.” Psychiatry, vol. 27, pp. 218- 219. 98 Ibid. 99 Rappoport, Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. 100 Chafe, The Importance of Not Being Earnest. 101 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 102 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” problems and overcome them - again an admirable character trait.”103 Not only do Bosnians accept the stereotype of funny fools, they made a brand out of it and are also proud of it. Throughout the interviews participants mentioned that Bosnian humor is an example of a true humor, or the way it should be. Having such humor is perceived as a noble character trait. For example, one of the participants of this research stated: “We think that it is very noble if you can tell a joke about yourself, the quality of humor lies there. If you make a joke about other, in which you are excellent and the other is stupid, this is the most miserable level of humor. We tell jokes about ourselves and relief, release our spirit. Making jokes about yourself is very helpful, it is a catharsis of your mind.”104 Critchley argues that humor directed at yourself is the highest form of humor. Quoting from Samuel Beckett he calls laughing at yourself ‘risus purus’, despite laughing at own problems such humor does not make you unhappy, but on the contrary it elevates and liberates you.105 This ability to present self as a figure of fun is valued not just by the joke-tellers, but by the others as well. Senad Pecanin, participant of this research, a Bosnian lawyer, journalist and civil rights activists, has stated that Bosnians are welcomed in the region, in a way that being Bosnian means something appreciated because of their openness and ability to tell jokes on their own.106 There is a saying in Serbo-Croatian language – “*ebo zemlju koja Bosne nema,” which can be translated as “F*&# the land that has no Bosnians.” It implies the idea expressed by Senad Pecanin, meaning that it is nice to be around Bosnians, same as it was for children while they were around Dick Gregory, in the example mentioned earlier. The saying can be uttered by the members of any other group in the region who appreciate a Bosnian’s sense of humor and their openness. Bosnians have internalized the stereotypes to the extent that it is now even not clear for the general public in the region how they originated and who first said that Bosnians are stupid. The negative stereotype has been transformed into a positive identity characteristic. Additionally, as Davies suggests, ethnic humor constitutes a ‘playing with aggression’ rather than aggression per se.107 In John Morreall’s words, to enjoy the earlier mentioned joke about departing train, there is no need to have racist beliefs about Bosnians, we enjoy it due to the narrator’s ability to depict a case of unbelievable stupidity in a smart and amusing way.108 Bosnians enjoy their self-directed and self-deprecating humor because it allows them to rise above the situation, it demonstrates their ability to cope with the difficulties. Such humor creates a positive self-image that is appreciated both by Bosnians and others. Whether such humor remained the same and people continued telling similar self-directed jokes during the siege is discussed in the next section.
Siege humor
So far it has been argued that Bosnian humor as it is today originated as a response to disadvantages, suffering and oppressions that Bosnians have been going throughout history. The word oppressor has been numerously used in this paper, however, it was not explained who was the oppressor, during what periods of time specifically Bosnians have been oppressed. This research was not supposed to go into history and this seemingly over simplistic denomination may seem dubious without grounding it in history related literature, but it was not taken out of nowhere. Participants of this research have not openly named a historical
103 Neal R. Norrick. 1993. Conversational Joking. Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 104 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Z, Đozić. 13 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 105 Critchley, On Humor. 106 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S, Pecanin. 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 107 Davies, Jokes and their relation to society. 108 Morreall, Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. oppressor, but drew a link between their humor and historical suffering, implying that there was always someone who governed or invaded Bosnia. Here are a few extracts from the interviews demonstrating this point:
We are a country that has been suffering since its existence. So, it is not just this war, but every war, be it an original or world war, or whatever, we were somehow part of it and we were affected. We are really a culture and a place that carries this spirit and this memory, that is sometimes subconscious and sometimes not, but it is our reality and who we are. This is I think one of the reasons why we turned out the way we are, we have the culture in which use humor to ease the pain that is inevitably there.109
Bosnia was always at the crossroads of different empires, conquerors and different people were coming to Bosnia. Probably it was the only way to survive, to keep your spirit up and to preserve it, to survive all this invaders, practically our country was always invaded.110
If you read the history of the Balkans or the ex-Yugoslav republics, Bosnia was always hit the hardest.111
There is no goal to go into related literature to figure out the extent to which such claims are historically supported, what is important that the ideas expressed in these statements are widely shared and have a relationship to the topic under study. When we tell jokes we usually focus on what is going at the present time, rarely we tell them in relation to the events that took place decades or centuries ago. Although there may be some, I have not heard any joke about Austro-Hungarians or Ottomans, who have invaded the current territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, those would not be of current interest in a daily conversation. It has been so long ago that it is probably the reason explaining why the participants of the research have not named a particular historical oppressor. In the 1990s the situation was different. Sarajevo was besieged for 1425 days. Sarajevans knew who were the snipers hiding in the mountains around the city, who was cutting down electricity, gas and water, who was gradually and purposefully destroying the city and killing its civillians. In the presence of an obvious oppressor has the target in the jokes shifted from self to other, to the enemy that was now present on the borders of the city, not the ones who remained in history? A similar case in the studies of humor under extreme conditions is the case of Holocaust. While being famous just as Bosnians for self-directed humor, Jews have targeted Nazis in their jokes, but it is questionable if such humor became more widespread than self-directed during the Holocaust. Chaya Ostrower, in her study of genocide humor, has shown that in concentration camps the most frequent kind of jokes were self-directed in nature.112 Self- directed humor, in the view of Holocaust survivors, was a tool against the Nazis’ attempts to dehumanize them: “When they laughed at themselves and their situation, their self-directed humor allowed them to do the exact opposite of what the Nazis intended – to maintain their humanity, “to feel that we’re still human.”113 Similarly, in Bosnia, while there are no quantitative studies of siege-related humor, as the one Ostrower conducted, it is considered that targeting the enemy was not something usual or normal, Bosnians themselves remained the
109 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S, Čehajić-Clancy. 24 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 110 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Z, Đozić. 13, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 111 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S, Draganovic. 25 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 112 Ostrower, “Humor as Defense Mechanism during the Holocaust.” 113 Ibid. targets of local jokes. While I’ve heard some jokes ridiculing Slobodan Milošević, Radovan Karadžić, Ratko Mladić or Serbs in general, such jokes do not represent a common norm. By choosing not to ridicule their oppressors they chose to be different from them, having higher morale and dignity. This function of humor may be classified as an ideological position in response to oppressions and sufferings, but humor had other important functions in daily lives of Sarajevans. What has already been discussed, although it was not explicitly stated, is related to coping function of humor. Every single participant of this study has stressed humor’s potential as coping mechanism. The interviews were primarily focused on the war period, however, as it was demonstrated, distinctiveness of Bosnian humor takes roots not in the wars of the 1990s, it has been forming as a coping mechanism in relation to the atrocities and difficulties to which Bosnians have been subjected historically, as they themselves claim. The kind of humor that is widespread in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as in the cases of other disadvantaged groups around the world, is centered around the need to cope with the difficult situations they have been facing. Humor changes the situation, Wallace Chafe defines it as “a way of intentionally eliciting the feeling of nonseriousness.”114 It creates an alternative world, in Greek or Shakespearean plays comedy is taken as a “time out” from the real world.115 In humor, both Critchley and Rappoport argue, we detach from the real world in which we suffer and thus cope with it.116 In times when we practically cannot deal with what the world suggests through humor we can at least rise above the situation.117 This tendency has been observed in numerous extreme scenarios. Viktor Frankl, a Holocaust survivor, has mentioned that even in concentration camps people still have an ultimate freedom to choose an attitude towards what is going on, rising above the situation using humor is one of such attitudes.118 By engaging in humor in the face of ultimate threat we demonstrate that we are still able to cope with it. Conversational analysis of laughter illustrates that people often follow a trouble related utterance with laughter. Gail Jefferson, an expert in this field of humor studies, states that by laughing after telling a personal trouble story producer of the utterance demonstrates that he realizes existence of the trouble but also is able to take it lightly, that he is able to cope with it.119 While telling a joke in relation to the troubles we experience we put the situation into a perspective that devalues it.120 Humor’s potential as a coping mechanism is the cornerstone of Freud’s theory of humor and of the relief theory that is built on the former: “Like jokes and the comic, humor has something liberating about it; but it also has something of grandeur and elevation. The grandeur in it clearly lies in the triumph of narcissism, the victorious assertion of the ego’s invulnerability. The ego refuses to be distressed by the provocations of reality, to let itself be compelled to suffer. It insists that it cannot be affected by the traumas of the external world; it shows, in fact, that such traumas are no more than occasions for it to gain pleasure.”121 This feeling of invulnerability is specifically expressed in self-directed humor, in which we treat ourselves as a child from the position of an adult or father, however, it is a comforting father who does not criticize you, but tells that you are fine despite the traumas or difficulties you are going through. Also, pleasure that is constituted in humor lies within the refusal to suffer, it
114 Chafe, The Importance of Not Being Earnest. 115 Morreall, Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. 116 Critchley, On Humor. Rappoport, Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. 117 Ibid. 118 Victor E. Frankl. 2006. Man's Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press. 119 Jefferson, G. 1984. “On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles.” In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Action; Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 346–69. 120 Fine, “Sociological Approaches to the Study of Humor.” 121 Freud, "Der Humor." lets you believe that you are strong enough to cope, humor changes the situation and makes it more benign. Freud suggests a joke about a prisoner, who is being led to the gallows, to demonstrate his argument. Before being executed on a Monday day the prisoner looks up into the sky and tells ‘Well, the week’s beginning nicely’.122 By telling this joke the prisoner chooses a humorous attitude towards life and creates a pleasurable subjective reality in opposition to an objective world in which he is going to be executed in a few minutes, in Freud’s words it means: ‘Look! here is the world, which seems so dangerous! It is nothing but a game for children - just worth making a jest about!’.123 However, as Freud suggests, humorous attitude is a precious gift and not every person is capable of it.124 Bosnians definitely are among the gifted ones in this respect, and during the wars of the 1990s, specifically during the siege of Sarajevo, they have exploited it to cope with atrocities on a daily basis and most importantly, it was self-directed humor that was employed as a coping tool. In talks about siege period in Sarajevo, as well as in literature about this period, one of the most frequent words mentioned is spirit. Survivors of the siege and war talk not simply about the atrocities they have gone through, but also proudly describe how they creatively coped with them. Vucetic, for example, claims that the siege of Sarajevo did not gain its fame just because it was the longest siege of a capital city in the modern history, or because it was the first war in Europe since the Second World War, but also because of the spirit the besieged citizens have demonstrated, and humor contributed a lot to the spirit of Sarajevo.125 It is interesting if the war and siege have changed Bosnian humor, or conversely, the kind of humor Bosnians had shaped their attitudes towards the war and siege. Üngör and Verkerke state that genocides and culture, to which humor belongs, mutually shape each other.126 Üngör and Verkerke’s suggestion is valid because it is very unlikely that only siege has affected culture, or the other way around. Nevertheless, it is going to be shown here that a more common tendency in Bosnia was to stick to what was considered to be normal in the pre-war times in response to daily atrocities, and thus culture and humor have shaped their attitudes towards the siege more than the other way around, and most importantly the traditional way of humor persisted. One of the common implicit assumptions in literature on humor in Bosnia during the war is that it has changed and became more aggressive, and that the target of the jokes became other instead of self, what is generally not a common practice in Bosnian culture of humor. Üngör and Verkerke point out jokes directed at Serb nationalist leaders responsible for the war, like Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić.127 Authors are not wrong, such jokes indeed existed, as for example a joke comparing Serb President Slobodan Milošević to Geppetto (Slobetto) and his protégé in Bosnian Republic of Srpska Radovan Karadžić to Pinocchio (Radovanocchio).128 Other targets of such jokes were Croats, with whom Bosnians also had a war in some parts of the country, such as in Herzegovinian region, or passive United Nation peace keepers. Bosnia and Herzegovina was considered as the least nationalistic state in the former Yugoslavia, and Sarajevo was an unofficial capital of multiculturalism. One of the participants of this study claimed that one of the worst identity categories in a pre-war Sarajevo was nationalist.129 The siege of Sarajevo became a test of its multiculturalism and Sarajevans are
122 Ibid. 123 Ibid. 124 Ibid. 125 Vucetic, ”Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 126 Üngör and Verkerke, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide.” 127 Ibid. 128 Chuck Sudetic, “This Can’t Be Bosnia, There Is Too Much Laughter.” New York Times, 7 July, 1993. 129 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S, Pecanin. 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. proud for their success in preserving that state of affairs even in the face of ethnic war. Remy Ourdan, who covered the wars across Yugoslavia, stated that in the region in general Sarajevo was one of the two cities only (another was Tuzla) citizens of which have collectively demonstrated antinationalist sentiment throughout war. Humor was part of it. Norrick suggested that humor may be seen as a test of shared knowledge and attitudes, and the kind of humor Bosnians continued to practice demonstrates their opposition to new circumstances they have faced.130 Nationalistic jokes, while existed, did not constitute a common humorous attitude. On the contrary, humor was a tool to demonstrate that they were still normal people as they used to be. Two participants of this research were members of Top Lista Nadrealista (TLN), the most famous comedy show in the former Yugoslavia which continued comedy production during the war, have expressed a feeling of pride in that they continued laughing at themselves or at the situation in general rather than at enemies, and the latter were aware of it as the show was available outside Sarajevo as well.
Mujo hearing the news that Croats had demolished a mosque in Central Bosnia, responds: “It doesn’t matter, we’ll demolish their mosque in Zagreb.”131
While Croats in the joke are portrayed as enemy, an actual target is a Bosnian who narrates the joke, it represents traditional Bosnian humor directed at own stupidity. Mujo, a fictional character representing Bosnian Muslims, lacking critical thinking skills, in an attempt to express a feeling of revenge wishes to do to the enemy the same what they did to Bosnians, to demolish their Mosque in Zagreb, a place of worship for Muslims. Despite existence of jokes about enemies most of the humor has preserved its traditional traits, even when enemies are present in the joke’s plot. Although it could be assumed that targets of the jokes would be the other, the enemy or oppressor, Bosnians continued ridiculing themselves. In the war-time jokes the other continued to be a figure of secondary importance, while the primary stress was on the Bosnians themselves. In one of the jokes Mujo hides in the mountains from Serbs but was caught by the Arkanovci, a paramilitary group under command of Željko Ražnatović, famous for atrocities and war crimes. Arkanovci for some reason decided to show their mercy and suggested that Mujo have one last wish, to which he responds – ‘I wish there are hidden cameras’. The wish implies that Mujo expects it to be a comedy prank and the joke illustrates Mujo’s wittiness, as well as ability to cope with inevitable threat to his life, he does not lose the spirit even in the face of death. While Mujo is just a fictional character, the joke teller similarly expresses a feeling of invulnerability by telling this joke while living under the conditions of constant threat to life in a besieged Sarajevo, same as the prisoner in Freud’s joke. Despite the known cruelty of Arkanovci, in the joke they are not the target, but are used as a setting for self-ridicule. While the jokes mainly continued to be non-aggressive towards the others, an implicit aggression towards self can be observed. Superiority theory of humor implies comparison not just between the self and the other, but also between the present self and the former self, which represent the superior and inferior self correspondingly.132 We sometimes look at ourselves back in time and cannot believe we could be that stupid or fail something so miserably, for example, and from our current presumed triumphant superior position we look at inferior former self, humor in such scenarios may often be elicited. A recurrent concept in the interviews was naivety. From what the participants have said in the interviews, in Bosnia almost no one believed that there could be war. Senad Pecanin, for example, stated that he did not think war was possible even one hour before it started. The war was unbelievable until the
130 Norrick. Conversational Joking. Humor in Everyday Talk. 131 Kreševljaković, “Humor under siege: Mujo, don't jump around, you'll get hungry.” 132 Hobbes, Leviathan. time it has started and it became obvious it was in fact unavoidable. Participants have described themselves as naïve, because they could not imagine the war while probably they all knew deep inside it will happen. The comedy group TLN, members of which were Sarajevans of different ethnic and religious backgrounds, became famous for their sketches about life of ordinary people in Yugoslavia both in Bosnia as well as in the region in general. Some of their most famous pre- war sketches, that were considered as absurd at the time, have predicted the war. In one of them, when the Berlin wall was still in place, Sarajevo was divided by the wall as well and the parties on the sides were leading a war until one person stays alive. Kenan Zekić, who was in Sarajevo during its siege commented on the sketch: “They just exaggerated reality. When you exaggerate things you don’t expect them to come to life, and actually that’s what happened. That’s what kind of made them famous. And we continue to live in that exaggerated reality.”133 In other interviews a similar views have shared TLN’s producer Boro Kontić and its leading members Zenit and Elvis.
Definitely we did not do that on purpose (on predicting the war), it was spontaneous. The process of making a joke is to find some ideas which are unbelievable, completely unimaginable. And what you find in that way is funny. Separating Sarajevo, war in Bosnia and in Yugoslavia was unimaginable and it was funny. But then it became a reality. So, we find ourselves in a situation when our focus of point of view is moved for 90 degrees, and now we are in that situation and what can we do.134
When the war became a reality people in Bosnia realized they were too naïve and as a consequence were unprepared to it. Fighters on the front lines were badly equipped, necessary resources were not in place on the day the war started. While in the pre-war jokes Bosnians played with their presumed stupidity to demonstrate actual smartness, when the war has started some of them have looked at the former inferior self from the position of superior current (war- time) state. This explains an increased aggression in some of the jokes towards self, humor here was used as a tool for self-critique. However, aggression does not exclude positive aspects of humor, as Norrick argues: “Even if there is aggression in the message, there is solidarity in the humorous meta-message. Therefore, the in-group targeting humor between the equal members of our group, despite its critical load, has a positive influence on the unity and solidarity of the group, by raising and reinforcing the already existing bonds between them, and, at the same time, by adding an amusing tone in the conversation.”135 Also, it was not a passive critique. In extreme cases such as genocides and sieges, scholars focus on the perpetrators, assuming the victims as passive observers, what is an unfair observation. Sarajevans during the siege have been as active in terms of the cultural life, if not more, than before. Culture became a tool to fight the oppressor and cope with the situation, humor constituted a significant part of the cultural war against the besieger. Existing statistical data regarding the cultural life of siege time Sarajevo shows that around 182 theater plays were produced, 170 exhibits, and 48 concerts.136 Jusuf Hafizović, who was a child during the siege recounts the story about cultural scene of besieged Sarajevo:
My friend told me about the letter that was from one actor. If we classify her by the name she was Serb, but she was here, and she wrote a letter to her friend in
133 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with K, Zekić. 5 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 134 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Z, Đozić. 13 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 135 Norrick. Conversational Joking. Humor in Everyday Talk. 136 Üngör and Verkerke, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide.” Belgrade, and sent it over Red Cross. I think it was published and the title was like ‘I’m in a hurry to go to theater’. She wrote that the situation is not so easy but actors are performing almost every night, despite the bombings, absence of electricity. I think that was something that kept Sarajevo in that moment alive.137
While Sarajevans lacked means to fight the besieger directly, they chose to be active in their cultural lives and thus took a position of artists instead of victims. It is the same position of invulnerability that is observed in self-directed humor, a refusal to accept a threatening reality.138 Almost every participant of this study has participated in that cultural war. It was a way to disempower the oppressor, to take control of their lives despite the attempts of the besieger to dehumanize them and to make their lives intolerable.139 By engaging in the city’s cultural life Sarajevans have demonstrated that the city still belonged to them.140 Writers continued to write, directors shot documentaries, artists drew posters and put them up around the city, a beauty contest ‘the Besieged Miss Sarajevo’ was held, and Sarajevo Film Festival was initiated. TLN continued making sketches at the frontlines, during the bombings and under the sniper’s shootings, they broadcasted their shows on radio when there was no electricity to show the sketches on the TV: “Good evening all three of you out there who still have batteries.”141 Pjer Žalica started his successful movie director career during the siege: ”I volunteered but I was lucky to approach the right person. He was an army officer but a smart person. He asked me about my profession and I replied that I had just finished film directing faculty, and he gave me the papers that freed me from the service so I could make movies.”142 In times of extreme situations spiritual life becomes widespread and the culture prospers. Sarajevo is a case demonstrating it perfectly. Žalica’s war-time short movie ‘Children like any other’ is a good example of unconscious humorous attitude of besieged citizens. The movie tells stories of children affected by the war. One of its main characters was a boy cycling around destroyed buildings on a tricycle and singing songs.
So, you remember those kids. They are full of life. That kid, he invented that song. The lyrics are ‘how joyful and horrible it is’. That’s brilliant. He was riding a bike all around the city. That is a joke, it was war but those parents they left their kid to ride the bike all around the city. Not in such wide area as we shot it but in an unacceptably wide area for those circumstances. Of course I was not ready to let him ride a bike and shoot the scene. So the bike was on a trailer but he still got pedals to have a genuine feeling that he was riding a bike. At first, we were driving him and he was really singing all the time, but folk songs, the ones his father taught him. Then I asked him to sing something nobody knows, and he started singing that song ‘how joyful and terrible…’ I think it was just his direct reflection on that very moment. It was really joyful and horrible at the same time. That was the definition of life of the besieged city.143
137 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with J, Hafizović. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 138 Üngör and Verkerke, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide.” 139 Ibid. 140 Hadziosmanovic, J. 2014. “How is Culture Used as a Tool for Discussion of Conflict and Consensus: A Case of Sarajevo”, Journal of Transdisciplinary Studies, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 22-46. 141 Sudetic, “This Can’t Be Bosnia, There Is Too Much Laughter.” 142 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with P. Žalica. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 143 Ibid. The words joyful and horrible are oppositional adjectives greatly characterizing life in Sarajevo during the siege. Despite daily horrors there was room for joy as well, and the laughter was everywhere, even at funerals, as some participants have claimed. When all members of a group go through the hardships a related humor refers to the common suffering and softens it by indicating that everyone else is going through it at the same time, everybody can laugh at the surrounding abnormality by being able to relate to it.144 Jelena Hadziosmanovic, in an article about cultural life of Sarajevo, claims that production of art was a way to gain freedom from oppression.145 Similarly, Boro Kontić, one of the active participants of Sarajevan cultural life, concluded that through humor they were claiming their right to freedom on a daily basis. Humor was not only a coping mechanism, but also a way to continue a normal way of life. War changes the lives people are used to under normal conditions. As Ivana Maček suggests, the old world is destroyed by the war with its assumed norms and the new war-time norms emerge.146 Humor may be used as a tool to manage the implied incongruity between the two.147 Realizing the necessity of sticking to the new norms may be a difficult process. Maček provides an example of a woman refusing to hide in a ditch during the shelling because she was afraid to tear her nylon stockings.148 In the face of new seemingly abnormal norms victims of extreme conditions felt a need to be ‘normal people’, it belonged to their moral framework, as Maček states: “Normalcy not only communicated the social norms held by the person using it but also indicated her or his ideological position.”149 Preservation of normalcy, as social scientists and psychologists argue, is a common response under extreme conditions.150 Maček describes the situation when people tried to stick to the framework of a normal person as imitation of life.151 As participants of the research claimed, to be normal meant to be ethical, urban, cultural, Western, educated. Twenty five years after the siege, and after Maček’s fieldwork, the participants of the current study still explain their war-time behavior through the concept of normalcy.
It was difficult to escape the reality. I wouldn’t say we tried to escape, but we tried to ease it, with all forms of arts during the siege we really tried to make life easier for us and we tried to live a normal life. Instead of fighting every day, instead of thinking all the time about death, morgue, hospitals, bombs and shelling, I would love to see the movie if possible, to go to the theater, to read some books. And when my friends journalists who were going out and coming back would ask what do I want them to bring me, assuming I would ask some food. However, I would ask for books, magazines, and perfume. These three items were more important. So, it is not to escape, but to pretend to have a normal life, kind of imitation of normal life.152
In this kind of situations, in exaggerated reality, you accept it. Expecting to be killed any minute, and then you trying to live a normal life, kind of copy of life. That's
144 Archakis and Tsakona, “Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor.” 145 Hadziosmanovic, “How is Culture Used as a Tool for Discussion of Conflict and Consensus: A Case of Sarajevo.” 146 Ivana Maček. 2009. Sarajevo Under Siege: Anthropology in Wartime. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 147 Üngör and Verkerke, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide.” 148 Maček, Sarajevo Under Siege: Anthropology in Wartime. 149 Ibid. 150 Ibid. 151 Ibid. 152 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with S. Lizdek. 15 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. what people do, I mean, otherwise you go crazy. You try to behave normally, telling jokes, making reality checks on the situation around.153
Continuing living a normal life implied opposition to acceptance of new norms. Nevertheless, in some cases living by the old rules implied deadly threat. As Sarajevo was surrounded by the snipers the way people moved around the city has changed – ‘to run or not to run’ became an existential question. Bosnians are known for a slow way of life – “It is just our way of life, it is slow. We are a lot slower than other people around the world.”154 However, in the context of fear of being shot by sniper people lost freedom to walk. In the documentaries about siege of Sarajevo people almost always run. A decision to run implied that people lost control over their bodies, consequently some people even refused to run, but many of them would be shot by the snipers, in the end running became the most common way of moving around the city, but it also assumed loss of dignity. Bosnian writer Ozren Kebo, survivor of the siege, writes about running in the besieged city in his book Sarajevo: A Beginner’s Guide:
I ran with water canisters in my hands. Everyone laughed at me. When you run with canisters, you tremble, your arms are not bent, but rather stretched out, your movements are distorted. And it looks so silly. However, the artistic impression is not that important, it’s important to stay alive.155
The dignity people lost due to inability to walk normally was restored through humor. Numerous jokes and sketches humorously addressed it, both to comment on the situation and to restore dignity. In one of the jokes Mujo and Suljo are running across the street under the snipers’ fire: “Mujo takes a hit which shears off his ear. He stops frantically in the middle of the bridge looking at the ground. Suljo yells, “Get under cover, idiot! You’ve got two ears!” Mujo: “F*&# the ear, I am looking for the cigarette!"156 This joke comments on the new norms people had to accept, also it highlights the necessity of cigarettes that were in scarcity, as well as it traditionally portrays Mujo as stupid. There was a humorous video shot about the situation, an old looking man wearing a hat, a cloak and holding a case hears sniper shots. He slowly takes of the clothes, stands in track and field position and starts sprint running. In the end he victoriously jumps with his hands spread wide and it turns out that he is wearing a Nike T- shirt. The video pauses and the Nike logo appears on the screen.157 Similarly, TLN collective made a sketch about running:
I remember we made a sketch about funny situation. In one sketch during the war we suggested a new Olympic sport, running across the sniper crossroads with the canisters full of water, because water was important during the war. So, we found a real sniper crossroad and made this sketch. It is funny that, in the war everything is strange, and people did not see the cameras, and they did not know what was going on, they thought it was a real fight. One of the actors fell down and pretended he was dying, and one taxi driver came to him and wanted to pick him up and to take him to the hospital. So, our craziness in the sketches, in our ideas, was mixed
153 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with K, Zekić. 5 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 154 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Neira. 22 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 155 Ozren Kebo. Sarajevo A Beginer's Guide. Translated by Amira Sadikovic. Sarajevo: Šahinpašić. 2016. 156 Vucetic, “Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia.” 157 The Siege. Directed by Remy Ourdan and Patrick Chauvel. Blanche Guichou, Agat Films & Cie. 2016. URL (http://www.remyourdan.com/the-siege/). with the craziness of the reality. We did it not in safe areas, it was directly on the front lines.158
To my question why they would risk their lives to make such sketches, TLN members Zenit and Elvis replied that they could not stop, they had to continue because it was their job both in the pre-war times as well as during the siege. They saw a need to provide their audience with humor to let them get through the catastrophe. Humor was as essential for people as water, it was a way to cope psychologically and a way to protest against the norms imposed on them by the besieger. I have to mention that I was once criticized for taking humor of TLN collective as a case of Sarajevo siege humor. The critique held that they were famous across the whole ex-Yugoslav region and thus it was not a Bosnian phenomenon. It is true that TLN could be classified as a case of Yugoslav humor because Bosnia and Herzegovina was a part of Yugoslavia when TLN was found. However, its members, at least those who still live in Bosnia, would prefer to consider it as an example of Bosnian humor. For example, as one of the leading members of the group Zenit Đozić stated during the interview: “We developed our original way and improved Bosnian humor.”159 Additionally, the idea that TLN was famous across the region and thus it was not strictly a Bosnian phenomenon oversimplifies how individualizing characteristics affect audiences. Larry David is probably the most famous contemporary practitioner of Jewish humor—he is popular across the spectrum of society. Monty Python is quintessential British humor; it is popular with British and non-British audiences alike. Thus, ability of people across ex-Yugoslavia to appreciate TLN humor does not make it non-Bosnian. Moreover, it was a case of Sarajevan humor specifically. When I discussed Bosnian humor with Sarajevans most of the participants would tell me that when they talk about Bosnian humor they actually mean Sarajevan humor. Although Bosnians had to accept running as a new war-time normality, they found a way to diminish the humiliation implied in the loss of control over their bodies through humor. Such humor, could be perceived as abnormal, however, as Victor Frankl pointed out “An abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal behavior.”160 Assuming abnormal humor as normal within the framework of abnormal situation is comprehensible now. However, to someone who has not experienced what Bosnians have gone through during the war it may be difficult to perceive the extent to which humor was widespread. While going through the deepest sufferings, witnessing death on a daily basis, how can someone find strength to tell jokes about it? To demonstrate the quickness with which people were able to employ humorous attitude towards the violence and trauma they have just experienced one of the participants shared a personal story:
If war and siege is your everyday life, then it is normal. I remember, once, I and my future wife, girlfriend at the time, have witnessed a manslaughter. We were walking home, we were on this right side of the city in Koševo, so we passed by this BBI market, it was ruined, and crossed the street and we went through the park towards this little hill, and then another street. All this time there was a guy walking in front of us around fifteen steps in front. He crossed the street, we crossed, he passed the park, then we did, and then his head exploded like watermelon. Sniper shot him. Just meters in front of us. And it was not funny. But just in ten minutes, maybe thirty minutes, when we came home and talked about it, somebody said ‘luckily you were not jogging, because you would jog in front of him and would be shot
158 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Z, Đozić. 13, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 159 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with Z, Đozić. 13 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 160 Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning. instead’. So, you start telling the jokes, not diminishing, not making it less important, but assuming it as something not sacred.
One of the questions participants were asked to answer was whether they still tell war- related jokes, and predominantly participants replied that it would be strange to engage in such humor at present day. When asked to tell a related joke everyone can come up with at least a few jokes, but in daily conversations one is unlikely to hear them. Respondents told me that it was a spontaneous reaction to what was happening at the time. What else would you tell jokes about when all you have is war. Nihad Kreševljaković assumes that telling such jokes was normal at the time, but now they would give rise to the feeling of discomfort.161 Peter McGraw and Caleb Warren suggest a theory of benign violations, that was mentioned earlier in the research, which holds that “anything that is threatening to one’s sense of how the world “ought to be” will be humorous, as long as the threatening situation also seems benign.”162 Authors suggest three conditions letting the violations to be seen as benign: “(a) the presence of an alternative norm suggesting that the situation is acceptable, (b) weak commitment to the violated norm, and (c) psychological distance from the violation.163 The theory holds that whenever one of the conditions is at play a violation may be seen as benign and thus elicit laughter. It implies that whenever we laugh at the situation we perceive it as benign. From the current time perspective it is difficult to assume that participants of the above-mentioned story could take the death they have just witnessed as benign because it is difficult to imagine an alternative norm suggesting manslaughter as acceptable, although they were not murdered they were still strongly committed to the dangers of life in a besieged city, and clearly they were psychologically close. Nevertheless, the theory implies that as long as participants of the story could laugh at the situation they also perceived it as benign. In a different article on this subject authors make a distinction between the tragedies and the mishaps.164 The former can be seen as benign if temporally, socially, hypothetically, or spatially distant, and the latter when close.165 Case of siege of Sarajevo without any doubts falls in the category of tragedies. Nevertheless, it was not temporary, but lasted for four years, Sarajevans were the direct victims of the siege, it was happening spatially close to them, due to the shelling they could die even in own apartment, and it was obviously not a hypothetical situation. So, the four elements enabling victims of the extreme situation to perceive it as benign do not fit the case of Sarajevo, however, they still could tell related jokes and laugh at them. One of the possible explanations is that we evaluate the conditions suggested by the authors from the position of our current time norms. However, in the case of Sarajevo, the norms have changed, and thus participants of the abovementioned story could perceive the violation as benign taking into consideration the new war-time norms. It is just an assumption, but in the context when people were murdered on a daily basis thirty minutes was enough for a psychological distance from the violation, or people were less and less committed to daily atrocities as they were getting used to live in a besieged city. Sarajevo was not besieged for a week or month, but for years. Participants of this research have stated that they were getting used to life under siege, and thus humor in relation to the violations, that most people would not be able to take as benign from the perspective of the current time norms, might be normal. These view has been expressed by some of the participants of this research “If war and siege is your everyday life, then it is normal to tell jokes about death” or “War is
161 Kreševljaković, “Humor under siege: Mujo, don't jump around, you'll get hungry.” 162 McGraw and Warren, “Benign Violations: Making Immoral Behavior Funny.” 163 Ibid. 164 McGraw, A.P., Warren, C. and Williams, L.E. 2012. “Too Close for Comfort, or Too Far to Care? Finding Humor in Distant Tragedies and Close Mishaps”, Psychological Science, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1215-1223. 165 Ibid. not a funny story, but when it becomes your life and you are under shelling every day, then you can tell jokes.”166 Perception of an extreme situation as benign or non-benign is relative. People experience sufferings differently. In most of the cases people would not be able to perceive sufferings that Sarajevans have been going through as benign, however, from what has already been discussed in this work, historically disadvantaged groups have developed a special kind of humor that allows them to cope with the most extreme situations. Bosnians, because they have been historically oppressed and suffered the most, as the participants of this research stated, can have a higher resistance to violence, what is represented in their humor. It is not to say that other groups do not respond to violence and sufferings with humor, specifically, other ethnic groups in the region have also undergone very similar traumatic experience during the period of time discussed here. In the case of NATO bombings of Serbia, for example, humor and laughter was also ubiquitous. The focus on Bosnia here does not imply that it is an ultimately unique phenomenon. The point here is that some groups may perceive even the most extreme violations as benign and respond with humor and laughter because they have been historically going through similar experiences, while the groups that have experienced wars and oppressions less frequently may be unable to do the same.
Humor and Bosnian Identity
Humor, as Bosnians believe, is part of who they are, and they continue engaging in it even under the most difficult conditions. Just as Bosnians continued going to cinema, theaters and concerts, they continued engaging in their traditional humor, because it is an important element of their identity. Jokes, and humor in general, can be taken as oral traditions that provide information about a particular society. The fact that one of the group members told the joke ‘luckily you were not jogging’ indicates that telling such jokes is considered as normal in the framework of that situation, otherwise it would have given a rise to a sense of discomfort among others who heard it. Research participants admitted that it was normal to tell such joke, and the act of telling it and accepting it as normal by replying to it with laughter provides a sense of membership. Diana Boxer and Florencia Cortes-Conde argue that in conversational joking in-group knowledge is demonstrated.167 If the joke evokes laughter among the participants of conversation it implies that they share some memory or knowledge; additionally, it implies that there is a congruence between the joke structure and social structure.168 In Critchley’s words, there was a tacit agreement among the participants. He argues that having a common sense of humor provides a sense of thereness: “it returns to locality, to a specific circumscribed ethnos.”169 By telling that joke a joke-teller has demonstrated his attitudes towards the situation and by going along with it everyone else has demonstrated that they share it, this attitude on invulnerability was demonstrated in the concluding part of the story – “you start telling the jokes, not diminishing, not making it less important, but assuming it as something not sacred.”170 At the same time, not being able to engage in such humor could be a reason for an exclusion from the group. Maček argues that in Bosnia to be accepted into a group, especially during the war time, you had to demonstrate the capacity to laugh at yourself. 171 It was a
166 Orlov, D. 2019. Interviews with P. Žalica and R. Ourdan. 6 and 8 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 167 Boxer, D. and Cortes-Conde, F. 1997. “From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display”, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 27, pp. 275-294. 168 Glenn and Holt, Studies of Laughter in Interaction. Critchley, On Humor. 169 Ibid. 170 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with P. Žalica. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 171 Maček, Sarajevo Under Siege: Anthropology in Wartime. precondition for a spirit of solidarity among the group members sharing an experience. Despite the widespread rise of nationalism during the late-Yugoslavia, ethnic belonging in Sarajevo was less important than anywhere else in the region, as Maček claims, Bosnians were the least nationalistic.172 The highest form of social recognition in Sarajevo was to be a part of raja, not of a particular ethnic group. Neboja Savija-Valha, a Bosnian researcher, in the article about raja defines it as a mentality of a person, a code of conduct within cultural milieu that requires individuals respect these codes.173 Raja is a sort of imagined community members of which are normal people. Humor is an important part of raja. Being normal implies that you should not take yourself seriously, but always approach yourself with irony. Similarly, one of the participants of this research stated: “I think that when you grow up in a culture that is so strangely rooted in irony and sarcasm the first thing you have to learn is not to take yourself too seriously.”174 In Sarajevo you should be ready to be an object of irony for other members of the community.175 If you take yourself too seriously you would be shown your place, because in raja no one can rise above others, and it does not matter if you occupy high position in society or not.176 Savija-Valha highlights that it is not important if you are a celebrity or rich, it is important to be normal and treat others as normal people.177 Doctors and dustmen drink coffee together in Sarajevo.178 From my personal experience this sense of equality among people was one of the first things that I have noticed. Some of the participants of this study were local celebrities, such as for example members of Top Lista Nadrealista, as well as singers and producers. When we went out together to bars or cafes no one has ever approached us asking to take a photo with them. Once, we went to a night club with Elvis J. Kurtović and his friends. As many people told me, Elvis has a status of a legend in Sarajevo due to his membership in Top Lista Nadrealista and for his rock-band Elvis J. Kurtović & His Meteors. If you spend a few hours in any café in Sarajevo you may hear at least one of his songs. It is unlikely that there is any person from the war-time Sarajevo who does not know him. Despite this, during that evening everyone around us did not pay any attention to him and acted as if they did not notice him. At some point the band performing the music invited him to sing one song. The whole club sang it along and when he finished at least for one minute everybody was yelling his name, which is also in the lyrics of the song he has performed, for at least one minute – “Elvis Elvis Elvis J. Elvis Elvis Kurtović.” Then he came back to our table and was not disturbed by anyone during the time he remained. Telling jokes is a part of being normal and raja. Not being involved in joking, on the contrary, excludes you from raja.179 Raja is witty and implies competition – “a battle for being cleverer,” you need to demonstrate that you can tell jokes about yourself and others as well as that you can take them.180 As one of the participants of the research stated, it is like a process of initiation. The jokes are often mean but you have to take them to be a group member. Jefferson, in his study of humor, has shown that impropriety in humor signifies high levels of intimacy.181 Despite being mean, hostility in the jokes imply friendliness. Pjer Žalica tried to
172 Ibid. 173 Neboja Savija-Valha, N. 2016. “Raja : the ironic subject of everyday life in Sarajevo.” In S. Jansen, C, Brkovic, and V. Celebisic (eds.), Negotiating Social Relations in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Semiperipheral Entanglements. New York: Routledge, pp. 163-178. 174 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with A.B. Camo. 24 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. 175 Savija-Valha, “Raja : the ironic subject of everyday life in Sarajevo.” 176 Ibid. 177 Ibid. 178 Ibid. 179 Ibid. 180 Ibid. 181 Jefferson, “On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles.” explain the way people would talk to each other: “When you want to say something really simple, like you were late to class, you would say ‘f*&# it I was late to this f*&#ing class’. Or if you talk to someone on the phone you could tell ‘where are you, f*&# your mother’. I mean, when you translate it, you cannot believe, but that’s why I think we are a little primitive. Because we are accepting it like the folklore, as a way of communication.”182 It is important that he mentioned that talking this way is taken as a folklore, it is rooted in the kind of humor that is characteristic for raja. As an outsider, when people start ridiculing you means that they accept you, it means that you are recognized at the highest possible level, you are raja. Additionally, by ridiculing you members of the group demonstrate their appreciation for who you are and your success. Savija-Valha provides an example of Ivo Andrić, who received the Noble Prize in Literature in 1961, and I have heard similar stories about him from several participants of this research. Instead of being openly praised for his success by the compatriots Andrić was often ridiculed for being a recognized poet around the world. However, while not telling the words of praise directly, by making fun of him Bosnians were demonstrating their respect, that they also recognize his success. Humor in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Sarajevo specifically, although not to diminish other regions’ and cities’ contribution to Bosnian humor, was not just a response to the siege of Sarajevo. It was a very normal and expected response to the situation, but its origins lie not specifically in the need to cope with the violence Sarajevans have faced during the siege, but in people’s identity, culture, and folklore that has been shaping throughout history. Humor is what makes Bosnians who they are, it is a significant, visible and distinctive element of their identity. In their attempt to preserve a sense of normalcy during the siege Sarajevans continued to engage in their traditional humor – discontinue would mean they have lost control over who they are.
Bibliography
Avner Ziv. 1984. Personality and Sense of Humor. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Apte, M.L. 1983. “Humor Research, Methodology, and Theory in Anthropology.” In P.E. McGhee and J.H. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research. New-York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 183-212. Archakis, A. and Tsakona, V. (2005), “Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor”, International Journal of Humor Research, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 41-68. Arthur A. Berger. 1993. An anatomy of humor. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Boskin, J. and Dorinson, J. 1985, “Ethnic Humor: Subversion and Survival”, American Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 81-97. Boxer, D. and Cortes-Conde, F. 1997. “From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display”, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 27, pp. 275-294. Carroll, N. 1999, “Horror and Humor”, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 145-160. Chuck Sudetic, “This Can’t Be Bosnia, There Is Too Much Laughter.” New York Times, 7 July, 1993.
182 Orlov, D. 2019. Interview with P. Žalica. 6 July, Sarajevo, Bosnian and Herzegovina. Chapman, A.J. 1983. “Humor and Laughter in Social Interaction and Some.” In P.E. McGhee and J.H. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research. New-York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 135-158. Christie Davies. 1998. Jokes and their relation to society. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Daniels, A. K. and Daniels, R. R. 1964. “The social functions of the career fool.” Psychiatry, vol. 27, pp. 218-219. Denich, B. 1993. “Unmaking Multi-Ethnicity in Yugoslavia: Metamorphosis Observed”, Special Issue: War among the Yugoslavs, vol. 11, no. 1/2, pp. 48-60. Fine, G.A. 1983. “Sociological Approaches to the Study of Humor.” In P.E. McGhee and J.H. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research. New-York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 159 -182. Freud, S. 1927. "Der Humor." Passage 34 (2000): 18-21. Gordon, W. Allport. 1958. The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Addison-Wesley. Hadziosmanovic, J. 2014. “How is Culture Used as a Tool for Discussion of Conflict and Consensus: A Case of Sarajevo”, Journal of Transdisciplinary Studies, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 22-46. Henry Bergson. 2003. Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic. Salt Lake City: The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Ivana Maček. 2009. Sarajevo Under Siege: Anthropology in Wartime. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Jefferson, G. 1984. “On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles.” In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Action; Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 346–69. John Morreall. 2009. Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. Jonathan Waterlow. 2018. It’s Only a Joke, Comrade! Humor, Trust and Everyday Life under Stalin. Scotts Valley: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Leon Rappoport. 2005. Punchlines: The Case for Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Humor. Westport: Praeger Publishers. Maček, I. 2018. “Transmission and Transformation: Memories of the Siege of Sarajevo.” In A. Dowdall and J. Horne (eds.), Civilians Under Siege from Sarajevo to Troy. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 15-35. Mahadev L. Apte. 1985. Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. New York: Cornell University Press. McGraw, A.P. and Warren, C. 2009. “Benign Violations: Making Immoral Behavior Funny”, Psychological Science, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1141-1149. McGraw, A.P., Warren, C. and Williams, L.E. 2012. “Too Close for Comfort, or Too Far to Care? Finding Humor in Distant Tragedies and Close Mishaps”, Psychological Science, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1215-1223. Michael Billing. 2005. Laughter and Ridicule: Towards a Social Critique of Humour. London: SAGE Publications. Neal R. Norrick. 1993. Conversational Joking. Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Neboja Savija-Valha, N. 2016. “Raja : the ironic subject of everyday life in Sarajevo.” In S. Jansen, C, Brkovic, and V. Celebisic (eds.), Negotiating Social Relations in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Semiperipheral Entanglements. New York: Routledge, pp. 163-178. Nevo, O. 1984, “Appreciation and Production of Humor as an Expression of Aggression: A Study of Jews and Arabs in Israel.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp, 181-98. Nikopoulos, J. 2016. “The Stability of Laughter”, Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. Nihad Kreševljaković, “Humor under siege: Mujo, don't jump around, you'll get hungry.” Aljazeera, 22 November, 2015, http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/humor-under-siege- mujo-dont-jump-around-youll-get-hungry. No Author, “Bosnia’s Stand-Ups Jest about Genocide.” The Economist, 17 October, 2017, https://www.economist.com/prospero/2017/10/17/bosnias-stand-ups-jest-about- genocide. Ostrower, C. 2015, “Humor as Defense Mechanism during the Holocaust”, A Journal of Bible and Theology, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 183-195. Ozren Kebo. Sarajevo A Beginer's Guide. Translated by Amira Sadikovic. Sarajevo: Šahinpašić. 2016. Philip Glenn and Elizabeth Holt. 2013. Studies of Laughter in Interaction. London: Bloomsbury. Philip Glenn. 2003. Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Plant, B. 2009. “Absurdity, Incongruity and Laughter”, Philosophy, vol. 84, no. 327, pp. 111- 134. Plato. 1997. The Republic. In Cooper, J.M. and Hutchinson, D.S. (Ed.), Complete Works. Indianapolis: Huckett Publishing Company. Plato. 1997. The Philebus. In Cooper, J.M. and Hutchinson, D.S. (Ed.), Complete Works. Indianapolis: Huckett Publishing Company. Robert R. Provine. 2000. Laughter. New York: Penguin Books. Sarna, J.D. 1978. “From Immigrants to Ethnics: Toward a New Theory of "Ethnicization", Ethnicity, vol. 5, pp. 370-378. Scruton, R. 1986. “Laughter.” In J. Morreall (ed.), The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 156–171. Sigmund Freud. 1990. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Simon Critchley. 2002. On Humor. London: Routledge. Slavoj Žižek. 2014. Žižek’s Jokes. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Srdjan Vucetic, S. 2004. “Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia”, Space of Identity, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7-34. The Siege. Directed by Remy Ourdan and Patrick Chauvel. Blanche Guichou, Agat Films & Cie. 2016. URL (http://www.remyourdan.com/the-siege/). Thomas Hobbes. 1985. Leviathan. London: Penguin Classics. Üngör, U. Ü. and Verkerke, V.A. 2015, “Funny as hell: The functions of humor during and after genocide”, European Journal of Humor Research, vol. 3, no. 2/3, pp. 80–101. Victor E. Frankl. 2006. Man's Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press. Wallace Chafe. 2007. The Importance of Not Being Earnest. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.