ANTHROPOL L RESEARCH IN SOUTH EAST EUROPE PROSPECTS FOR OGICA - Moscow, Russia N. N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology Russian Academy of Sciences, and , Belgra e, Institute of Ethnography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts d

Prospects for Anthropological Research in South-East Europe

Editors Marina Martynova

N. N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology IvanaRussian Baši Academyć of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Institute of Ethnography, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, , Serbia

MOSCOW – BELGRADE 2019 UDK 39 BBK 63.52 47Querl

Editorial board:

Dragana Radojičić (Institute of Ethnography SASA), Srđan Radović (Institute of Ethnography SASA), Natalia Belova (Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS), Marina MartynovaThe reviewers (Institute: Marina of Ethnology Simić and Anthropologyty of Pol RAS) Sceince, University of Belgrade), lena Filip ova ( Moscow, Russia)(Facul itical E p Institute of Ethnology and anthropology RAS, PROSPECTS FOR ANTHROPOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN SOUTH-EAST EUROPE

/ Ed. Marina Martynova & Ivana Bašić. – Мoscow: IEA RAS & Belgrade: EI SASA, 2019. – 238 pp. ISBN 978-542-110-238 0 The book marks a new phase in the fruitful collaboration between the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology Russian Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Ethnography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. It is an important publication for any future research on the development of ethnology and anthropology in . The papers presented here, the topics they raise and the methods they employ, comprise an overview of the issues, concepts, phenomena and research methodologies anthropology in this has been dealing with in the early 21st century. Positions of the discipline itself, transformations of traditional culture and various phenomena of contemporary culture in Southeastern Europe are subjected to a theoretical scrutiny in the papers of this volume.

© Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, 2019 ISBN 978-542-110-238 0 © Institute of Ethnography, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia, 2019 CONTENTS

NTRODUCTION I AND IDEN ITY CONTEMPORARY ETH OLOGICAL7 –AND12 L I. “NETWORKING” T – N ANTHROPOLOGICA Delivery(SELF of) REFLECTIONEthnographic Material. The 15 25 Work of Eth ologists in e Conditions f ‘Project Ines Prica, n th o – Interdisciplinarity’ ultidimensional Identity and National Tradition under the Condition of Pan- 27 39 Petko Hristov, MoM Is y of a Un ted Europe Possible? s – European bility. Ethnolog i HE EW C THES OF

II. T N LO nthropologicalTRADITIONS Interpretatio of 43 65 Popular Cos ology: Research Pers ives. Milan Tomašević, A n – inship some Calendar m pect 67 88 brations. A Case tudy f the bration of VesnaEpiphanyPetreska, in MacedoniaRitual K in Cele S o Cele – ubarac Matić, Fr Serbian Epics to The Hague Thematic C rcle and 69 113 ĐorđinaBack:Tr Decasyl abic Singing omas a theLinguistiClassical Register Seen from the Functional Perspi – l c Katerina P Kuzma , A ective 115 131 ch of t e Role of R Processions in Folk Traditionetrovska nova spects of the Resear h usalian –

5 DERN GAMES AND RITUALS

III. (POST)MO J a

he Celebration of Childre 's Aleksandar Krel, adrank Đorđević Birthdays in Belgrade and Consumer Society 135 152 Crnobrnja, T n – itics on the Fo ll Fie d. An

Overview of the Relationship between Id ology Ivan Đorđević, Pol otba l and Sport in erbia 153 177 e – S MMORPGs and 179 206 Ljiljana Gavrilović, me Ba ic Fa torsNationalism of – Pilgrimage in Contemporary Serbia Biljana Anđelković, So s c 207–229

6 UDK 39+327+347.514.3 DOI: 10.33876/978-542-110-238-0/153–177

Ivan Đo

rđević POLITICS ON THE FOOTBALL FIELD. AN OVERVIEW OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IDEOLOGY AND SPORT IN SERBIA

p f c o interrelation in bia. ly, it uses n period Thiseen aperhe nd ocuses WWII ond the endhistorical he 1980s,ontext lf asthe f of sportsts n and ideology Serf First foc nd o thelist betw n t e of ndly,an the of t s as weln onch the rolell fanso spora sumedi thethe activitiesle f the o theers ofcommunist a sociay in ideology i l Yugoslavia. Seco nalit demonstrate f the waysh i whi y. Thefootba ird s hero o er carrirings nationalisticocus he ideolog o the politica occurrences t n mof the fi wdecade a o thet wtwentiet centur 1990s, th lsegment n of t pap ba s intot f t activities “ nf football fans ein he ewi p illenniumn n hen, fteringhe arsy.of thee Serbia, ntat eastf ominally,r became o the tateicallyhat internalizesed Europeag ofvalues“, alland nsnsured t, tss ositio a p,of a llEU-acced ld countr of nTh centralt politicalargume actor.o the papehey refers t uslyhistor ct s subjectscondition f the positionin footb o fa tha a p grou stia kho the role t “ a importan s which c n be letT ou simultaneof the b le again,a if anda when neeo ed. neo-liberal politics f the European eriphery nd eepers of he national pirit“, aKeywords: t o rbia, ott former dtball, alism, p Se Yugoslavia, foo ideology, soci ostsocialism e f a i r t c societal ss in ern urope and Serbia as ecome prominentSport, speciallych ubjectootball, f merousnd ts isciplineselation to n he omplex s. proce Southeast o Ea a p h b a resear t s o tnu o ud i recent year at A significant a volume d f books, t r rticles, nd ublications havec developmentsapproached his surroundinsubject from the dissolutheir wnon niqueof position,. aiming disclosing nd etermining he ole sport played in the histori g i Yugoslavia 153 Ivan orđević ------Đ Indeed, football had a ificant symbolic ole in he t d a t f i t sign p r t t c processt of ofthe he “brotherhoodisintegration ndof SFRY.nity” ofIt wasugoslavused peopless a peculiar to ypeualo catalyst nn the shift of bhe ideological d n thearadigm pillarsfrom thehe oncep n the late 1980s,a u ll fansY cross the territory individ f ethnicaviaationalisms, mbraced reakingistow a i of post-WWII r unimaginablestate. I essages footba thnic a rance into he ublicof ormer, Yugosl s e ere nationalsed weekideology eeknd ntroducedt the stadiums.thus fahe culmination ofm his processof e wasintole reached on tay p 13, 1990spa ce at message thats w expres after t w m a b D T eb and Red Start Belgrade l clash betweenM heir fa gr andMaksimir the policetadium. ccurredNamely, aheadn of 3;he orđevićatch etween 2012). inamo andZagr Serbian fans, ineda argeo ce lt with n oupsl violence, confrontedo he (Brenti 201hich Đroved powerless Croatian in r entdeterm is scalation.t repla ssentially,verba the scenariophysica t s t police, i w p c s thei attemptpointed toto theprev denouementth ofe the culminatingE Yugoslav crisis, w unfolding at i he p tadium n t the 1 Croatian i apital ymbolically a H E t ahich would reach ts eak during l t he r 990s a n the armed a conflictsived in S and Bosnia nd erzegovina.c ven though he t rmed“ conflictswhen thestarted wa began”a year (Mihailovićater, he 1997iots t Maksimir re perce in both erbian and Croatian ollective consciousness as he day r r h o i ). c i t r b f t ent onward,The footballMaksimir becameiots ad ne mportanty contaminatedonsequence y n termsic of he elation(s) etween f ootball t t and r politics. From hat mom 1o i permanentl p f d tb nationalist l fromideology , andtic”football apital,ans of heatedwo yespective their countriesipationassumed in the theeventsrole of thef an latemportant 1980s andolitical early 1990s.actor, rawing heir egitimacy “patrio c formul b partic t i o i o w f f n Hoberman,However, “sport heaynvolvement erve any ...)f theiven footbally”fans Hobermann the dissolution f Yugoslavia as ar rom accidental. As oted by m s ( g ideolog ( N i v i s d socialism 1(Zec 2015), but biquitous s it c l 1980s and earlationalistic 1990s. deology was also isible n Yugoslav port uring without u presence a was the ase in ate 154 y on ------Politics the Football Field 1993: 16). This s clearly e in he ignificant mpact vel of socialist ideology n ing the framework of ports development in i visiblII t ia.s This eedbacki le ion between rts andi determineology ften alls the contradictions f thepost-WW ist system,Yugoslav in hich f ball relatd as playgroundspo or e idcietal ndo conomicdemonstrated eriments of system. onally,o sociale game f football wwas oftenfoot usedserve s a a of omogenizationf divers of ugoslavso aentitye Zec andexp Paunovic the lly,Additi the th l o s occurring n thea factormer Yugoslaviah Y n footballid and,( n turn, the 2015). t Logica o ideologica i transformation s a ip for t were i mirrored m i p i a omnigame had hece cruciallyrole f a nfluencedsymbolically the mportantated ocietalationsegment, sses,henomenon r l madethat themhrough visible.ts ass character, opularity, nd -presen i st transform proce o at east The main oal of his paper is point out the historical context in hich he ntertwining f diverse ideologies nd tball occurred n Serbiag and trmer toia), nd hich d the specificw ole t of i his sport ino y erbiana foo . i e ysis( f fo Yus goslav n a istw and determineocialist times, ill r attemptt to tcontemporar i S t societytal phenomenonThrough th anal n e o football’ role irocessessocial of erbianpost-s with pecialI w ttention givenhighlig to htontemporaryhe mportance rrencesof his socie – o i th transformation t c p t c S “ society, , throughs its positiona s a c the pitalistoccu from i socialistthe role society,f football o thein he reationon f theof he nationalisticommunist new man” and c heroes.a messeng Througher theseof ca , footballrelations fansn a into t creati alo ctors, nd n the “avant-garde”y contextpatrioti of erbian society they re erceivedstages as he keepers f nationaltransformed rests.”relevant his societ a on a eterminedi contempor ootball ar S S t a as pcific supra-ideologicalt “ o an u inte Tle na transformatilistic a d f in contemporary erbia hrough pe prism, with nquestionabt f s tionao genda. t context of he n of ports and ideology n the od betweenIn hehe ndirst f WWIIection andf thethe endpaper of heI focus1980s,on as heell historicalas t role f sportst interrelation the activitiess f the i nd peri ti e o t s t w on he ways o n which i football ans o thecommunist role f thea socialists ideology n Yugoslavia. In he econd section I demonstrate the i f assumed o carrier 155of Ivan orđević ------Đ nationalistic ideology n the litical occurrences of he l decade t t c t p b i focus the activities fi footballpo fans n the new t fina , en afterof he thewentieth wars of theentury. 1990sThe Serbiathird, atsegment least nominally,of he aper becamerings a ntoate i “ o v ai e millennium i p wh a EU-acceding ountry. The central ment f the r st o thethat historicallynternalizes European alues“itioningnd nsuredf footballts fansosition ofa n s c t r a argu o pape refers T ty ly conditionedct s subjectspos f the o l politicsthat, f s a group, till p hold he a ole k of n important t “ political s actor. hecan besimultaneous let out of the bottlea a again, if ando whe needed.neo-libera o the European eriphery nd eepers of he national pirit”, which n ROM KING F THE W T e W W I transformation f the al F THE s MA YO “NE WMAN” O “ SELF-MANAGEMENT t P ”. Than end of orld ar I instigated o a core- T t f o r polnsitic f theand societal former Kingdomystem in ugoslavia.re gone, ithd the victory new socialistof he systemartiz troops under t theoleadership p f Josip tBroz lito, he inal emai To on f the were e anstem aused astic s becamethe domainhe f sportsfficial s well.olity oof a certainhe iberatedextent, thecountry. new he transformatigovernment approo enti thestat heritagesy ndc experiencesdr ofchange pre-W inI Yugoslav o a d T l t v soci alist t l rs2 priatednd a developed in SSR rdanWI 1999; rentinsports and, but Zecit id018:primarily 717).ean In onhishe respect,ision based the on heer “bourgeois”ideologica pilla teams,a practicallly hosemodels rom the U rban(Rio rs such reB nd 2 b, ere t tically sed, ndform teams were stablishedespecia nsteadt f 2013).larger In 1945,u twocente new footballa clubsBelgrade were a foundedZagre in welgradeprac – first erad an newch, Pe Oi (Wooda c Y A B t t t Re u i Mar s and t then p artizan in ctober, a s theB official lub of c ugoslavity Peoples’ rmy (JNA). Even though he wo eams sed the stadium of he re-war teams Yugoslavia nd SK, no intentional ontinu he n reason d is ppropriation the act y the porting2 societies in lavia before WWII were the ore the rs’ Ta mai c c behin tht a C is P f that mane, heof relations en the Yugosew t ment nd c rtsof had workeready movementestablished somend typelosely of contonnectedy. o the ommunist arty. Therefor t betwe n socialis govern a spo al 156 inuit on ------Politics the Football Field was proclaimed y the w teams. n the other nd, a new am Z i W I a t Dinamo’s atronsb erene the membersO f the policeha nd te wasintelligencefounded structures.in agreb Then the onlyaftermath sig ofnt exceptionWII. t is in ssumedth processtha was the fatep f Hajdukw rom t, se o ent anda state- took n art in he enifica against the Italian is ier d ou f“ Spli rwho managem p playerst matchesa active on hep reedt erritoriesresistanc uring WWII (Woodoccup 2013,an acted as the nofficial Partizan epresentation,” laying wenty t f t d 5; Dežulović 2013). m t n s s establish a new order within his segment of ociety, not The main o otive of whe ew ystem s was to ymbolically th “ i tn t e s b allow ing any t possibility s rf continuity ith the past ocietal ovalues, wiascistthe pastYouthbourgeois” – were to dentity. Thehe aluesew eams sstablished ny thethe pillars formulatedof he ocialist evolution . Therefore,– the JNA ollowingand Alliance he ovietf the model,Antif the l tionpromote f the t v entseen of arganizedadequate ports,i newlally- included, wasstate setorder to heir romotionf s the t mainS orm of e generatime f direc ist youth.o developm his, portso were tos ervefootb ideal mechanism for emphasizingt p a fa t ileisur o “brotherhoodo social nd nity.”Through dditionally,t sportss re eens as ansthe for improving the working and thefencereconciliation ndf he the dea f Finally, the organizeda u Ats ere to erve we ools or as a me the accomplishments dev ismcapacities aroundo state.be, t p spor w i s as a t f promo e ting Essentially, the first ofwarYugosla riod socialas ized they glogent mainly hrough t S articipation n internationalt g m sporting vents.oslav “new man” (Zec and Brentinpost 2018:pe 718;w Millscharacter 2016 b dili application of he oviet model with he oal of aking the Yug t o w ).n k f t b t C P o YugoslaviaHowever, nd his vision nf socialist1948 hadsports a crucialas impactot ept nfor alllong. e The crisis oollowing he clashs etween the communist arty t ef b a Cominform T i t a o S th models,segments notf onlyYugoslavia’s n the politicalociety. andOne economicof he onsequencespheres ut of hi otherbreach societaletween omains,ito and Staling organizedwas he sports.bandoning In his ofse,oviet the o i v s c s b also n t c d m includin m aging sports, and trnedsen s making f the Yugoslav ersion of ocialism aused the abandoning of he entralized odels of an tu toward157 Ivan orđević ------Đ promoting the idea f gement” as he ain of anaging d sports. , e o m w n so “self-mana a t m functioning c wasmodel far fromm realistic,organize hen it Expectedlye to ighlyth popularapplication rtsf suchthis sodel footballas (cf.ot ecuccessful nd rentins the sustainability18, Kovačić 2016).of sports lubs even f officially ndependent,even w tscam lubs ereh closely spo to tatea tures, Z a Bn, o large20 mpanies. n this Ther,efore, their i i p spor c t wp a connee cted supports strucof state agencies.and ofte t co I way functioning was made ossible due to he olitical nd conomic t t c m t a y autonomous unctioning f managementNevertheless, resultedhe in ransformation froms of alayers.entralized They ereodel oto necessarilysignificantl mateurs ore butf re antedmodel ymento forsports e, s all othera workerschanged nstatu the e.p hese arly w gesn of the a anymn of ports we had gr a crucialpa impact ntheir developmentperformanc ofa ootball uring ie yearsstat of mature”T e sta i the 1960sprofessionalizatio and 1970s. s o the f d th “ socialism, n b T d n o i t w m b a an The, split-up and in etweenany ysito and Stalinnt, id ot nlyl haved mpactal onrole.he Theays sportof matchesanaging betweenorganized Y sportsvia utandlso grantedR them d additional m a m Twa importa s ideologica f t dan politic the ate” ugoslav cialism andugosla its stiff SovietUSSS transforme A m into ore l thant game. ghey became a tage o or d he uel between Games“apost in ampereY (Finland)so in 954. The matchversion. tedere significantchance ed ovelone of suchublic ameattentionbeing inplayed oth countries,ut uring ndthe Olympic of upport To the ams were 1 y the attracs, ito da Stalin, warningle thep players eb i a tea legramsf game.s It tas ardedte rathersent b atterstate of leaderighest T ationalan interest. he atch tself wastha onet this of hevent osts more thancular ootball n the historyw of reghe he SSRas teama m h o n e differenceT m5:1, equalizingi he t n mthe finalspecta fifteen evennutests iof the met ndgame. T ingU a h.managed his resultt wasretrieve th e of t S t score H i t re- mi by playing-tivia a th ensur core re-matc 3:1, demonstratingT a symbolicgreeted with xultation int he Yoviet media. owever, he T match p was wwon Yugosla h wi a s t t c f ls superiority of he ugoslav socialist model. he layers ere greeted158 as eroes; nevertheless, hey lost he ompetition ina on ------Politics the Football Field e on f Hungary. , the faith f the Soviet eam was tly fferent. s a consequence, againstMoscow,th thenational militaryselecti m whicho most Howeverf o on’s memberst yed for,significan as ismantleddi and Athey CSKAof l the privileges hey enjoyedtea in ociety o thehat pointrepresentati t 2007, 341;pla nđelić w d 2016,were stripped Theal connection betweent ootball ands liticsuntil t (Goldbld its atll potential Ad confirmed2014, the113–114; importanceMills f sports1747–1756). s a tool or promoting avia f a outsidepo of tsdemonstrate orders. fully, it onfirmedan he otential s had in akingo and a tf coheYugoslion of theas st te.state i b Additiona c t p sport m reinforcing he internalThe economics ransformationa ll from n amateur activity o a professional , occurring during he 1960s d 1970s, had nterestingt mpact on ofhe footbaerception f a e nal t a s sport Y t t oughan the lan ns,i it inoted t he p l o thll selectionnatio football selection f as ymbol tof “ugoslav identity. Viewedw a hr politica le t pcan be llocationthat t nationaf positionsfootba so hat ach SFRYwas always republicormed had following its he republicives, whichkey”, in hichumbersttent ereion was given a to he roportionalt aa o e t e c (Đorđević 2015, In representatractice, he odel ntherhoodw selected f ccording o the size nd o“importance” of ach i republi l elsewhere. he 50).orld pmpionshipt inm 1974 of can“bro erve andd exampleunity” unctioned for withoutg the modelmany of bstacles.anagingHowever, sports y thessues ayns of olitical Tnfluence.W TheCha onal election or s as a goop grouped a visualizinmber of ighly m wereb eenmea a p it p f nati g ps f Tthis tChampio nshi “Yugoslav”,nu under the h ctionrespected of he electors’players that , headeds byas he squadsuccessfulwith oachhe otentialiljan Miljanić,or reat anderformance. by ctinghe eeam waslestruly of T dire n t ps team t m t rs t s c i M arespe u th princip e self-management. Y he ational Tteam s romoted w s both he ain pilla by theof he public,tate’s settingdeology he – “brotherhoodar f eir ndre nity” – andent the veryuni qu . However,model of ugoslavn socialism. he ituationhe quad as as tronglyt. supportedhe ugoslav m t b o th futu a achievem a phighr younger i practice t t s was t allowedw differen to lay T for anyY team model of t anaging s bfootball proscribed t rule by which m ny laye n sthan twenty-eighped as is oday,no ady at p time st outside of he tate orders. Even hough the sports arket was ot nearly a develo it t alre that the be159 Ivan orđević ------Đ among e ayers arn a gnificant f ney r their mance and achieve a s l o e pth pl a could L e thesi state’s amount prohibitiono mo causedfo a perfor f a very t ustainable p evel t f incom t fromwere welllaying broad.nd rivilegedogically, within he te, they ere d the significantright to level of rustrationork road,mong hed bylayers. hat timeEven ohough all izenshey Y paid aT p o statet sta edw denie football temporarydisplayed itsw shortcominab gsgrante at the Champit onshipt in Germcit any ofin 1974.ugoslavia. ost ofhis herelic layersf the f e orchestrat Yugoslav electionmanaging ereof ching the e when hey llowed to ffer their s to oreign M kets, andt peir al o thations ere wells edw approathe football field. aghe eam t were w ar o i servi cey fs wmar l t th re aspir m w o mirror aon resulted in ts liminationT t effon rt e as earlyeplaced phaseby of ndividualhe displaon of(Anđelićkills, hich4, ed o a Untilcomplete at oint,alfunction playing fforthe theteam ndal h bi e r ui th t competitia t However,201 114–115). ome erious,th ostlyp financial issues, nationd spoilteam thead goodeen eamaising it.nquestionable Even idententhusiasm Josip Broz mongito, heer players. t n s s c m t a starteg i to to itionalt paymentspir for Pres hen rformingT aft or thevisiting nationalhe ationalelection”squad, oncludedn 129).hat “it Thewould goslavbe ood dea selectionprovide andadd the public t ointthe playersere notw yet shakenpe y f ethnic ensions.s ather,(Wilso he riction2006, red Yu o economicfootball reasons nd nnounced a ethis comingp wrisis of he ugoslav b inter-st model t sed on R t ment.f Theappea duel dt power ofa he a ugoslav projectth was stillc strong,t butY on his socialiion the firstba ks self-managen the system f faultpolitica solidarityan ideologicaled t o Y f t t gt occ as t field were cracto e thei n icho thede nt f apresent nt themselves w nbthe football d ield. In he same – way,t che ame and e he b its core.spaces i wh announceme o differe crisis ould e made uring the 1980s he risis with thnic nationalism at O LONGER Sunday fternoon n the town f on ay th, 1980 was reserved or ootball. n N S a “BROTHERS R ”. ma a i S Croatian f r importanto Split tch Min 4 hampion's e race. Atf f inutes O th 3,is daythe SundayHajduk pliternoonnd edasStar Belgrade ntoet t Poljudingtadium o an ma the c titl 5 m past 160 aft w transformed i someth much bigger on ------Politics the Football Field than ootball. t that oment, t was announced that he ent Y T a F t o al f nt,A the playersm f bothi eams nt centerpresid d, of ugoslavia o Josip c Broz T ito g had passed way. ollowing t he ffici announceme a T e o t gt a gathered r i k fiel t directionmany f them he rying.ugoslavhe leaderathered vedcrowd in brokeuildinginto thehen popular song bout. Onlyito, xpressingen ears ater,heir onrief eptembernd eadiness 6, 1990,to eep at he same ocation,t3 Y eenpa duk andb an socialistgrade Yugoslavia j t y h l g St p 2 k ito’st socialistl heritage.the Thematch betwtch Haj Partiz t aBel o showeduk’s ustanshow on far thingsn’s ad ers.one in ehe climaxrocess f ofthe eepingriot T t t Y ma wao s stopped due to he attack f Hajd .f Partiza play Th o was he burning4of he ugoslav flag n the highest flagpole t Poljud StadiumSimilar images rom football fields, by n o h h b t a common ent f om tadiums throughoutaccompanied he a f escalation f ethnic atred, ad ty that m ime become t l rather the beloved messageident s and thefr s ic urning f et state’sterritory flag ino SplitYugoslavia. were marked,The ten asyears tedbetween by rubaker,he ourning y an of he oss of g nationalizationpres of he symbolal phere bof he oteth Brubaker 3). Football culture duringsta he B s wasb all-encompassiny related o e political t inpolitic he sY ingt thesta final( 1996,on f T e t 1980 closel w h at th entered occurrenceshe tage n thet earlySFR 1980spreced nly deepeneddissoluti he o theexistentstate. nter-ethniche conomic ensionsand politicalong thecrisis constitutivehich adationslready f Yugoslaviat Glennys i ; Silber and Littleo 1996; agnont already Football stadiumsi ecamet the perfectam enery or he n o ist ( cts. 1996ans d ry G a 2004). f a new enemy, inallyb ound sc eers fn “thet escalationther side f nationalthe border”.confli Fans fF the replace teamedrival eamswith amesearch or Serbian, othf in heirf among their a p i o oo o o Belgrade-bas t bec explicitly b t self-perc eption nd n the gaze f the others. ideo t: HI, accessed:3 28 4.2018. Video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyG7CzJbFs, . accessed:4 28.4.2018. V available a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJSrjckW-j 161 Ivan orđević ------Đ The same s for the oatian ll fans n this eriod. eir as trictly defined h the prism of he l question, andgoe the newlyCr footba thno-nationalistici p Th e agencywas seenw s s the ect ool throor ugromoting he deast f thenationa g discoveredp s e t Y discoursblics (Đorđević a 015; perf t 2014;f p tin 2013).t i vertheless,o new the nationalisticinter-ethnic eliteslashes ainingtill remainedower in at omehe evelof he f ugoslaval repu . s2 Anđelić v Bren o Ne t a mentioned Maksimirc s iots n May 1990.t Thel clasho verbamongexpr the essionfans of However, oongrade,enough ansiolence of tookinamon ,flesh with and hee lreadyce marked bolic turnr in unfolding of ugoslav t Bel c the f D th t poli r a televisiona sym er of i theatian tingthe Yervice crisis.ed During he ommentary t tsection following the broadcast e w of he iots,re is o wisdom,report can soon thenoughCro happenBroadcas o all of S . In warn y the audience hats, hewhat iotshey n Zagrebwitnessed erewas markedan vent s “the5hich, ay“if the then war n.” and thee global mpact oft his eventus” is later-da interpretationconfirmed by NN,t r i ng t to we e “of fivea tballd whhesen that hangedbega he orld” in i Đorđevićt 2012, Millssomewhat Mihailović 19 C declari i b6 on foo matc c t w 2011 ( 2009, The importance97). f the mation f stadium stands bastions f Serbian, ian, nd ther ethnic nalisms be irstly related o theo high transforevel f the oence l ininto he public o e, s a Croat phenomenona of pular natioe. undredsshould thousandsf of eoplet at tadiumsl oacrosspres aviaof footbal t spher o a t r oc po culturo o H n oft the same ime,p hrough sedia, of Yugosliewers articipatedparticipated, in activelythe thus r passively, nseen inromotionhe ituals f “new”elebrating values,ne’s underminingwn ation. A main larst f t Yugoslavia.m Themi counterculturalllions v p er of n groups, amongfar u other aspects,p owed for the “forbidden” tthe to be pily o ed, and erbal nd charact ence, faich allo conten easil appropriat both v a physical viol wh Video available : atch?v=En6 5 =6s, a : 26.4.2 at https://www.youtube.com/w . games/index.html,wViD1jtY&t6 accessed:ccessed 5. .2018.018. http://edition.cnn.com/2011/SPORT/football/01/05/iraq.asia.six 5 162 on ------Politics the Football Field were common during he 1980s mong he rganized an groups, instated ggression s e eans f u already t f a a mt o f f f l l d a l a ths, mainhe ewm o communication. lites in Byand Croatianderstanding met theeir potential of, ootballbut veryas eans, anor ulfiy llingey reawouldpolitica use foran nestingideologica of goalhe t nves political e opposingSerbia s th i coincidental I R vocal S ally all oth C w u t narrati directlyf a the o acceptedthe “pillarsocialist f Serbianness”deology. n theseorđevićterms, 2016).ed tar’srly,winning he f the European p up ias sed for determiningg its declarationthis ootball team sndenceone f in o argely ased(Đ n the employmentSimila f t sportsnation- or buildingpromotingroject the “young”n Croatia statefollowin d nation. Therefore,of indepe t be 1991 was l t bc o o o d f 1980s nd t the beginning f an the 90s, football can bei can d concluded Ethat, in he ontext t f formert Yugoslavia curing the oa oa s o real19 when ented bydefine peoplefollowing withric a nameHobsbawm’s and surname”hought (Hobsbawmhat “an imagined 1992, 143).ommunity made ut f millions eems more repres eleven t e licts between an ups not limited only o the nd ts ithin the o Yugoslavia.However, In hehe arlythnic-based 1990s, conf ans replacedf thegro were wars ith the realt one, stadiumsoining hea rmedstree ormationsw in borderserbia andf Croatia. n rbia,t somee f the Redmany Star fans enlisted n the symboliclled Serbianw Volunteer Guardj under t e aleadershipf of eljko S ić lI Se ow c Čolovićf i). heirso-ca aking n ombat on he ormerth 7 goslavia Ž tory Ražnatov t permanentArkan, ater accusedlonizationof far rimes b ( 2000a t T i t o partnationalism.i active cost of he t uthorsf Yurching histerri subjectcaused prethe this period asco the turningo p footbaint in definingll y politics the relationsnd he betwdeologyeen fanf M n t a presea e t F inter t y emphasize the importanceo f ball culture in he f groups and the n ationalistic a olitical Slites. aurthermore, C ( he 2004; ilson 2006; ills 2009;o foot ielsen 2010; rcant 2003).processes In oe legitimizing the ationalistic genda in erbia nd roatia Foer W M N V th was one the leaders f the Red Star fans uring the late 1980s. 7cording to the es f contemporaries, ad n role n theRažnatović ng f heterogeneousof groups o t the tands into d u f group ofAc ”. Đorđevićtestimoni 015, 98–99).o At this point inhe h e theya important were the carriersi of theuniti idea ofo Serbian ationalism. a s the nified an “ ( 2 tim n 163 Ivan orđević ------Đ coming es, football fans ned patriotic l, s ned Bourdieu Bourdieu 1986). By ns f the olic ower had at decad isposal, ootballgai fans ere capitaanted a thedefi role byf important ( regarding meae issueso f thesymb alledp theyonal interest”,their d d they f wnto agr significant oal force, whoseadvocates opinion was closelyth consideredo duringso-c the 1990s.“nati an were transformed i politic

N ED N The n the f Milošević’s regime, “ZVEZDA w , S RBIJA c , IKAD tJUGOSLAVIJA d ” [“Rs STAR f , S tERBIA S, EVER in CroatiaYUGOSLAVIA and”]. Bosniashifts n thei politicss, aveo been erceived as especiallyal y hene membersit ame tof thehe enialrioticof upportublic” heor ootballhe erbs fans belonged o. he i lationmid-1990 etween h he oliticsp of he betray Yb th i o a “pat M p t t fn ic f t T interre s b A t war l p t “rump”up” was ugoslavia, mostly irrored.e., Serbia n nd the ontenegro,ns’ supportand ohe theationa nationallist ideas of ootball t fansr lowly faded. t a symbolic evel, n this F“break- o m ( i a m fa a t t d n ofselection FRY inof 1992,he ump keptYugoslavia. he ymbolsThe newf thestate, amedus ne,ederal only Republicremoving f theYugoslavia FRY) ndr omade ashe resultg. ofhishe issolutiocal continuity,S eived byt s ll ons s previo the o f communist eritage,five-point s asta fr gm t f Milošević’sfla T regimeideologi – tperc bfootba tfa s a vcontinuity oy h y wa vić’sparadi l o rty and the a paradigmpromotion hat thnicfluctuated nationalismetween as he ominantocialist alues officiall appropriatedin Serbia at t atb timeMiloše (Jansen 2005,po litica20–24).pa factual of e the d ideological pattern The state’sh them Hey ”, the ficial nthem of which was kept y the leaders the rump ugoslavia, as an “ t f o of a o SFRY, a the stadium stands,b h atedof n the Y etween w transformedand the fall ofchanged ilošević’swithin egimehe ramein 2000.f theThe“war attitudef symbols” f R t f Fwhic aculmin i s i s period i b p 1996 d Mhe hen rtremely popular Zvezda,o the ed Star ans toward [ RY Snd tsSerbia,tate neverymbols Yugoslavia”].s most Theotently expresse f g by t“ t ex t a schant: n “ t ortSrbija, the nikad Jugoslavija” “Red tar, Red Star an roup Delije” even ook n official tand ot o supp

164 on ------Politics the Football Field s a a e e carried he ame avia t c a t p s . Furthermore, hose national t election stlong m s th ostat 8t s n Yugosl e d and kept he oat ofdrms of he irevious tate t a t fans hat did attend ooing.he Overatches time, thisf the ormnational of election gainstxpr ancienesse theirrégimediscontent w t uring i each ntonation m oof he nthem a with t overpowering ba p p f ctures.protest The booinga f the em asasransformed o nto a potenty a eansans f rebellion gainst “nationalhe governmental i nd olitical ower stru f a s o w Milošević’santh w gime,n longereivedonl me ronousto expresss the symbols of “his”sentiments”; state orđevićt became an15,efficient method). ue oro theymbolic clashation ithof expression rend ommunicationperc as anach, footballa ns p(Đ f 20 a 119–120 oD t appropri s regime in Octobera c 2000. means fa presented a powerful olitical orce t the time f overthrowing Milošević’ Fans ere rceived as ital lly or he olitical n t t “ e much eededw egitimacype througha v the a atrioticf t p al” alreadyoppositio of hatt time,f endowingg het pro-European” p political block with th ationn to l iolence eristic“p f this ubculturecapit was wonore thanby heelcomean roupsn the in he reviousc politicaldecade. circumstances,Additionally, nd the assumedinclin the rolev f the charact g fist”o againsts the repressive mate wtus. n fact,i footballvery specifi fans ere the only roup illinga they ready o icallyo lash“punchin ith the forces t st at appara A g I e o a cw g g w and significance,t phys is he championsw law-enforcement ification a th point. oodT xample f such slash, which i carries reat Jsymb olic, 2000. This amet wasC ed yL aeague rge qualclash betweenmatch the Redagain thstr Georgian a torpedo at Reda Star’s tadium t n Belgrade,p on ulya 27orth g t f mark e b la t c “ Staiju fans nd he police, [ s an answer a to k he olice action t .the N riotstands n theafter stadiumhe irst markedver heperformance eginning off thehe heer ar Spasi Srbni ubie Redse, Slobodane” Star ans and“Save Serbias nd e,ill ndyourself, he entionedSlobodan”] The o t u ta b o t open p w betwee a t s system,th sultingf in heMilošević’ revolution”regim f Octobera t m, 2000. Footballche er became p he nofficial i nthem of f he th rotest t gainstt of he tate re t “ o 5 fans layed a significant role n the protests ollowing he attemp http://www.oa je/prica , accessed: 24.04.2018. 8 za.rs/sport/deli 165 Ivan orđević ------Đ the regime orge he esults f iamentary elections, resulted in ilošević’s resigning rom wer. he f their i to f l t r t r o parl r r t e levelwhi chof myth. OnlyM wo f n Decemberpo T narrative00, the o leading action n the “firstedia ines”adioof 92he ebellion apidlye Red Starose toansh for r contribution t o themonths later, i t the ceremony20 held t the x Culturaloppositional entrem in R Be. awardedn this ccasion,th they f ere theid “Heroes f tmocracy”“revolution” ith the a ing aboration: aGuys Re defied heC regime forBelgrad ten O c o w ww name slept in theiro De beds. They arew –‘Delije’”.follow el “ who t years, lashed ith the police hile others The polit l l of football fans,9 gained already at the t t d o a r They ere no ongerica capita publically d as riotic eroes imet ofthe he issolution f a f SFRY, revolution.was now revalorized ndhe einforced. a wer of hel an ulture perceiveained e same.pat In heirh bu on,as Miloševićheroes waso notdemocratic to e blamed or articipatingNevertheless, n t e war,nature t nd charact i Bt f c rem s th g t percep ti European” and “democratic”b f egimep i th he bu for losing t. y acceptingf fthis subcultural f roup, the t new “ “pro- on F r r i renewed pt political f or credibilityafter the ofalledootball “democraticans, turn”,till irmly nd hebased tadiumson werehe title patriotism”. t c ootball p fans emaineda as nan themportant first deolitical f the act so-c a t s kept as one of he entral olitical ren i deca o new millennium. t f s d Milošević’s gime ed o a ough f the ent However, he ormed alliance oon c issolved. t r The tfall sof re l t thor p rearrangement t v o existl democracypolitical paradigm. d marketThe newnomygovernment s the hose hes oadof heof he o- called a “Euro-integrations”, T nromoting a w he alues of iberal f g an w s eco f a t cornerstone p t t r desired EU t ccession. p shis agenda adid t ot elign ith the ideological pvisions of an roups,s and cheershich tillromirmly the stadiumheld heir standsosition on othe ight pole sinceof he theolitical 90s.pectrum, Now, ndrticulationheir nthusiasm of heir for emitting oliticaled message w m f s s had n diminished S 19 the a t right wing-orient ideology as anifested in logans uch are “ is erbia”, ccording to: 9 ge-srbije.html?alphabet=l A http://www.nspm.rs/komentar-dana/licemerje-i- neprofesionalnost-medija-dru166 on ------Politics the Football Field sending a clear signal o the w regime that he ans were he t “ n”. new um the new m folkloret of nehants filled itht ethnicf sti ll tnd keepershomophobia,of he suchnational s “Ubijquestio ”The ll themillenni Croat”], Ubij,brought Š stadiu p cs w i hatred “a žica, Srebrenica” “Knife,a Hrvata rebrenica”],[“Ki r bij “ za [kolji, theda iptarot”].ne Theostoji” [“Kill,e waslaughter, accompaniedso Shqiptar by slicitgone”], Nož,t the Bosnian Serb [ rs wire,atko S ladić and o “U n Karadžić,pedera” “Killh of themfagg ed forrepertoir wa crimes. exp suppor to leade R M Radova bot Theindict best mpler f the l nce the ll had uring re e attempts t a PRIDE nexa Belgrade,o intendedpolitica o influe promote the rightsfootba f fans LGBTin ommunitySerbia d Đorđevićthis period 2015b).a theady n the beginninga organizing f e 2000s, parade the firsti tempts t t his event were madeo the a part cf iming( “European Alr owever,i erbian o thal elites ere not fullyat committeda organizing upportingt PRIDE, ainly as a way o of proclaing a t values”. nH with S till powerfulpolitic conservativew political Greenbergto s 2006; ikušm as avoidfans, yet ain,direc ssumedconfrontatio the role f thethe unchings t” n enting he rganizationforces of ( RIDE. Alongside performancesM 2011). Football ( ag g a š [ o “p fis thei prev ts”], t j pedera”o ll the P ] etc.) and n the at thewalls,stands they “Peder dradom to hysicalneće etati” violence“Faggot willvicnot Trostwalk d streeKovacevic“Ubi 2013), [“Ki faggot”ng RIDE graffitiorm takingo citye. n b resorte i p w f g (Pavaso “ anan the state” Nielsensuccessfully 2013). The preventiblic erceptionP f eir nsplac as As l oted t y Nielsen, t n othis h ay ant roups became o stronger th t ( “ pu ap “ o th t actio s w aton easthe wofold.ther hand,On he a certainne and, heir f actions the publicf PRIDE erceivedpreve ntion markedactions ashem ustified.as violent The directhooligans” ndonenemies o the promotionof he tate”. Butt t oo c part p o t p their in Serbia, reinforcedj the l of oppositihe football tfans within s of he ofrights he foliticalthe LGBT ommunity,rum. hey as wereart ofagedhe right-wings e agenda a “our erbian children”capita eret nding the “true”, this egmentonal” values.t p spect T im a “tru patriots”, s S that w defe “traditi It s important to ote that, f the y al content hey are promoting and the nce they e, i n regardless o clearl politic that t influe hav167 Ivan orđević ------Đ football fans s explicitly political. i t t i o o t f g determine g f tthemselves m a t S a A valuableChurch, “Pravoslavlje”:llustration of his is he nterview f the leader f he Red Star an roup iven or he agazine of he erbian Orthodox t i a w a age nineteen, ver the responsibility to “Older t friends s went a no war when t all l began, i nd e, t (…) eighteen, We re not tookd ino olitics; e all have leadown privatehe tands, nd ationalism he lections.was eft Weas nheritance.anaged a a intereste a p w w our I this e remainedopinion united;on t e the -hoodm s oveto everythingbe political else”because (Pravomanyslavlje,ttempted 15.10 to08).in us over. n w Serb i ab s c i t .20 o i deeply ogy-based, oremost through the of nationalismThis tatementorđević learly and mpliesć 2018).hat Additionally,their form f theapolitical fact st i ideol f t o n discourse t Serbian (Đodox hurch pointsPeki o the importance f the thax this nterview t p was published fo by het i fficial ewsletter q of. he of he Orth ee C teply eligious, ando Orthodo standsreligion inre he rocessd withof rmulating logans heith deology unquestionablyin uestion rthodoxMany insignia.t fans Thes importancethemselves ndas deluencer f this eculiarvery often the union werea decorate early visible ins w ive of he ed Or ns o boycott the games a akeinf ace o asterp Sunday.religion-fan One of the fans’ leaderscl xplained s theiativeinitiat n the followingt R Sta fa “ t wall s wthat t plw on E r a “Serbianness”,e ich is thieryinit i n our stands.words: And weThe l knowidea hatas tartederb-hood henoeswe not obtainanted tots ntendedaise wareness importanceof without Orthodoxy“wh . v important i al t S d i i Here the etition10 of ern lished lready uring the 1990s omes o the he attern n h l identity s cessarilyrep theedpatt ith theestab religious ane dešević 2005; aleševićc 2006;t olovićforeground. T clearlyp visible.i whic nationanally, i ne intertwin w o (Mal M Č 2012) is Additio Daily ewspaper . 2018. 10 N “Telegraf”, 9. 4 http://www.telegraf.rs-video, accessed:/sport/navijaci/2949537-vodja-delija 10. 5. 2018. -vladimir-savija-objasnio-kako-je- rodjena-ideja-da-se-bojkotuju-utakmice-za-veliku-subotu-i-uskrs 168 on ------Politics the Football Field the n of he rthodox identity n the m of he an identity lies hat i f f similarlyintegratio to he erbiant OrthodoxO hurch i entssu ort oft f ideology, impich t bove“Serb-hood he ffairs,” nherited of verydayby ideologyootball ans, tt S f C redrepres s authentica s supra-s of the nation,wh he is aina advocatest a voicee of he tructure andt desiredpolitics. In hisiorway, ans areing(self-)decla the arge,a and ke eper se, group of eopleas t whom feel r andent themselvest s s the Redof her fans. behav designat entire l highly diver p o repres a Sta t “ p functions as n “anti-political machine” Ferguson 990) y procuringThe waysappropriation o depoliticizeof hepace,watch diminishingdog” ositionthe basicallyty f e ace f er e( ideology, 1 he b act ively establishing apoliticalt sty” h is, itself, highlypossibili o thThisappearan y no any oth d alt ernativs the exploitation atf ta same specifictime condition of “erbian societynormali whic t f M po litical.gime in 2000strateg and onward.ca be referreDuring theto aperiod of transition,o Serbiavery made an attempt to mplementS he rinciplesfollowing of hearketall of ilošević’somy and re a i E T of the so-calledi “transition”t p š 2013)m s stillecon ongoing, liberal transformeddemocracy, intos all athe self-fulfilliother statesng prophecy,n Eastern “revolvingurope. mostlyhis proc aroundess the ropes: (Mikuon weeni iberalisation todaynd oritarianism; e x relationship between he organizedfollowing crimet and theoscillati economy;bet orruptionl (...) regionala auth tion r disputes,th comple s failures n the EU t state, (Štiks and Horvat 2015, 1). Thec overall coopera t o o o successe t and e i i acces siont process”led expectation of nomic rity,disappointment d in “democraticwith he utcome policies fnderstoodsuch ransition, elitist,specially orrupt, morallyn terms ofspect,he andunfulfil disempowering” (Greenbergeco 48).prospe It ed o theresulte lack deliberate ejection uf active as onc n the political su and “non-participation n politics 2010,s a ‘rich set of l tal, itical andnd cultural ngagements’"r o participatirg 10, 43)i ecame a process political stand. he i a ideologymor lignspol with ahis political eposition, with (Greenbe o 20 rb legitimate t p t p pT current-day p fan a a r O t members t a f fan groups i efusing ato s ake art in he t olitical c rocess p they a erceive s intrinsically i otten. u ll”. n theey other hand, the position hey do ssume s presented as tep-away from he orrupted olitics, s a value set that s “above s a Th169 Ivan orđević ------Đ naturalize Serb-hood” and xy” bove ll d s t y t the proclaimed ean path” of erbia“ nd ffer a moral“Ortho positiondo as sa an lternativea ideological – the moralvalues. positionIn oing asedo, heyn adirectl totalizingrejec hat leaves“Europ o for a differentS interpreta o n. a a b o narrative t n room The mutual atio of a t i nationalism n be bserved n e context and stances th match between the dependenceal electionsfoot ofball erbiand ndhe deologylbania oft was to ake placeca ino elgrade,i nth October 2014. circumIn ublic, he of e was predominantly shadednation ys the tensionsS f the aunresolvedA thae of osovo,t dditionallyB oostedi f p mt match members f the Albanian b on ere borno re. issu he highK evel f security,a and theb decisionby hatthe theact Albanianthat ost of the attend heo atch, first incidentsselecti occurredw oonthe Despitehe t s beginning.l o Just efore e end of t he irst f-time,fans incannot he atmospheret m sembling ore a political rally shan aafter footballt game’ , a ing theb flag th the alledt f t Albaniahal flew ver t 11e stadium. here explosive mad” mbolically arriedt y the game d notdrone onlycarry ave impact nof the eventso-c at heGrea tadium. Its os thre felt n a muchT “ arger dius.lo Thesy eruption ofc atred bn the droneia id all over h al etworkso t te s l effect we againsti the lbanianra s, t wash noti limitedmed onlyand to soci b n caused ta staf of genera d tmobilization p c rs” Al defended arch-enemiehe victimizedand erb-hood“i form he s suchthe highly as shopsiased ownedrhetoric. by AlbanInianshe (Đorđevićollowing 2015,ays, 1 he atrioti “revenge t “ S t threat The outburst f ethnic atred, erbal3–17). nd ctual, demonstrated nce more the potential of he ball stadium f t do o h both v a a T naturalization o nd nuous roductiont foot of he acceptableto mobilize or he efence i f tthe p “endangered o nation”. S he” t c a conti o rep ( t A“ U, nationalism”,homosexual), embodied n bothootballhe fieldsromotion cross f theia “idealnto kserb f theand unquestionablein he onstant ationalismlocating fhatthe political“Other” elitesCroat, an lbanian,ive n E needed. balltransformed fans re transformedf intoa professionalSerb i tan ts”,o n t c d i when Foot a “ patrio T c t s f o i of Kosovo's 11status and on the proficient ins ing of A . he heering from he tands was mainly ocused n the ssue 170 ult lbanians on ------Politics the Football Field ethno-political neurs as ded by rubaker ker 2004, 10). Due to heir title on ism”, they an lways er their entrepreo ket worational goods”,B as hey(Bruba d t t at “ t patriot t f c a offme services i t the “mar ofa n p p t t prove p manytransitionalimes oerbia.be lwaysTheir readyvitieso mobilizere oselyheir orces oand e assu nt a role n fthe e complexpolitical elites,social aimingnd oliticalo herocess e in he ost- by politics as longS as possible.acti a cl related t th curre interests o th t keep t gam colonized

ONCLUDING The development of ootball n t p c b t Cg REMARKSb a . f a f i Serbia broaderin he ast societaleight decadesnd hasical beenontexts.onditioned iverse dominanty a transformat ogiesion inof hehe ame perioditself ut minedlways theheavily ysinfluenced n h nd llormed s beenby eived by otha thepolit politicalc elites D ordinary” fans. ideol t stated W i deterp w d wa ti whic bfootba ha percsocialist man”.b In his period, the primaryand “ focus was putFol lowing on s the end of WII, tsa urpose i i as efined phrough uilding v the “ newf rebuilding the statet in he h of WWII. he reach n ite educational w role nda tst pmportant a osition as t a S ehicle delor t c t aftermato T bi if th relations ith asUSSR ndainhe artialr of bandoningvia’sof he ovietist mo . Duringled to hehe onceptualizationame riod, andf football, t basedg on thet deals bo self- management, a t E the m B pillap Yugosla w social systemc importancet s f sportspe s a withe inhe herowing oliticalension ight etweenen ideologiesSFRY nd heas asternroughtloc, o therimarily ithund.the USSR,n the the othersymboli hand, societal nd oconomic a resourcions f thet Yugoslavp f tembetwe sed a continuousw reproductionb t of risisforegro that lsoO influenced This rocessa e culminatedcontradict uring the finalo years of hesys 1980s,cau th stadiums nsformed nto the c ic ocia -ethnic footbashes,ll. merelyp announcing the eventsd of the final dissolutiont of Yugoslavia.wi tra i symbol l of inter cla t s t s o T and his slavia ung at in plit n nd he t Viewedf tfrom he ymbolical t spoint, he oong of ath to ito illustrateYugo he ’ss Poljud p S i A1980, a t bur ningt of he lag of hat countryt i on he ame tsite fnly ten years lat er, t state p dissoluti pon rocess. m dditionally, t these wo events emphasize he mportance of he ootball stadium in communicating owerful olitical essages, ransmitted171via Ivan orđević ------Đ television o the millions f tizens f the former SFRY. The o r t e o he 1980s ecamet the main o ci ry oey or nderstanding ongoingideology processesf nationalism in footbthatll untilose totoday.prominence by he nd f t b explanato k f u the c f a t t s a p socialism, s the period cally starting er the at MaksimirBy omparingn Zagreb nootball May 1990,in he it imean ofe ocialismncluded nd that ost-he a symboli h a p aft oriots i on f thei game. c bt co f “ tist dissolution w of h Yugoslavia i ad t rofounds i impact i nn the be claimedtransformati that t o ime ootballRega wasrdless mostlyof he ocusedact that n thesocial me itself.football” The mainas eavily ctors nfluenced were the by hes, tate’snd hedeology, chievedt ca lts were the pointa aroundthat t hichf interests f bothf he ublico gad e elites ing a the t player ormulated.a t itha the resu d w a thew h triumpho oft hep an th t politicalmanag elites, the focusspor was were f t g W n start of Yugoslavia’sof ctors – otballissolution fans. Theirnd actionsit the became ore importantt nationalis an the ents f ll shiftedayers, fromd theirhe influenceame to a ew groupd to mucha fo rena of iety. e situationm didn’t hange th achievem a to footba f pl an i sprea na footballbroader in erbia.a Their soc s, Th ly thec mucholved until today, K nd t he E ans are still thet Pmost mportantP a actors i followed andS perceived asaction lly closeand p relatedly relevato t.unres issue of osovo, he U accession, or he RIDE arade, re publicly This tated core changesocia n the perceptionolitical f then game t same ime s the ss and the results f the led transition. Thes t is ined i ithin the o k of a athe state ont heillustrate uropean proce phery (Hughson o 2015; so-cal 2012: 444). Whenspor onsideringdef whe emi-peripheryframewor s a Serbia “systems a structuralt ocietalE semi-peri ch re intertwined withĐorđević location nd erritorialityc mpactt s e core of air of (Hughson s 15, 26),dispositions otball in whi aan e rstood theirh the prisma the ocal arket’sthat i ructuralth conomicthe functioning” 20 t s fo t c Serbia i c b unde l i throug Europe. In ofucht al divisionm f powerst on hee ootball dependencyarket, bianin teamsrelation to he tatese ofof heakingenter, n our case” i.e.,ocated makingn We sternrs who will fters a few matcheso leave tthe fricher countries,m Ser W have Ethe rol I m c “rawmstances,material the quality levelplaye of the a for mainly in172 estern urope. n such ircu on ------Politics the Football Field i a t m m t successful rade f young players, whose names e public o t evengame s rather tolow, emember.nd he ootballain task inof teams’ anagementy iss heft l t to i o th ad not ideologiesattempt f nationalism,r F contemporarhe status quo iSerbia i le to ive a within he ntertwining t f f t neoliberal politics w ndh thehe game itself ohas almost no importreproducingce at tall. The idea f rean whiching the “Britishmain ctors model”are inmoved from hell gamesield o arethe stands, and y in hic a their children, ent in dan t il o och rbian football đevićwhich 2012),footba in ts ssence is attended cosmopolitanb parents ire”nd (Simić . Thepres later presentsevery iscussionn pliciton oliticalhe ssues tandf Se at (Đor i i e g ta ““ s desy, o h 2014)ll list es, aSerbiaim ncluded,p re s th. Suchin aideal politicalparameters position,s eitherthe ultimate oal orof ubconscious,he civilized” hatociet ts het whicstates af thepost-socia center as hecountri deal odel Spasići 2011,a 278),aiming is used s the justification forcons thecious les ndured longt hese t y. However,o n reality het iunctioningm ( odel f British footballmainly s structurallya napplicable n erbianstrugg society.e ere, ahe t aywa n h the tradei of t f s mented aso y a e n thei road o iess and the o S “ H r t interpl a i whicty s a half-products emandi pres and a necessity,onl stag makeso e maintainingt succ of his achievinl possible.g of Europeanhe osmopolitanelevance”, dreamnd in is placedreali in one side,structural while thed tionalism of ootball ans th t o s t modet s T c T a sides ofo coin, na allowingf hef ontinuousflourishes reproductionon he ther ofide theof statehe opoliticalf “eternal pectrum.transition”.hey function s two the same therefore t c References Andjelić, Neven. 2014. “The ise and Fall of a: cs nd t S o Südosteuropa 62 (2): R Yugoslavi Politi a Football in he ervice f the Nation(s).” Bourdieu,99–125. Pierre. 1986. he orms f Capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. Richardson, 241–58.“T NewF York: Greenwood.o J.

173 Ivan orđević ------Đ Brentin, ario. 2013. “’A ofty attle r the nation’: he l Roles S i Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce,D Media, Politicsl b 16 (8):fo 993–1008. t Socia of port n Tudjman’s Croatia” Brentin, ario nd ejan ec. 2018. “From the Concept of he st New Man’ Nationalist D a Dn SportZ S Y Thet CommuniInternational‘ Journal of theto History of SportHooliganism: 34(9), 7 Research–728. Perspectives o in ocialist ugoslavia.” Brubaker, ogers. 1996. Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood13 and the National Question in the New Europe. Cambridge England NewR York: Cambridge University Press. – Brubaker, ogers. 2004. Ethnicity without Groups. : Harvard University Press. R New York and Čolović, Ivan. 2000. Politika simbola. Beograd: Biblioteka XX vek. Čolović, van. Navijači uligani i novi

I 2012. „ – h fašizam.” Dežulović,https://pescanik.net/navijaci oris. 2013. „Ostavite Hajduk-huligani-i-novi-fasizam/. a miru! Eno am AŠK i Građanski, a s ima e ćevu igu i vičite mo, ustaše!’.”B Jutarnji list, 30.11 n v H p nj igrajt Paveli l ‘Aj Đorđević, Ivan. 2012. “Twenty Years.2013. Later: he ar id not) gin at aksimir. n ysis f e Media atives bout ever Ended TootballW Game.”D ( GlasnikBe EtnografskogM InstitutaA Anthropological SANU 60(2): Anal o th Narr a a N F Đorđević, Ivan. 2015. Antropolog među navija201−216.čima. Beograd: XX vek. Đorđević, Ivan. 2015b. zmeđu ponosa rama. Antropološka o ’ p u s S Glasnik Etnografskog„I instituta SANU 68i (2):s 351 analiza narativa Paradi onosa’ avremenoj rbiji.” Đorđević, Ivan. 2016. “The ole of tar Football–366. n e Construction f Serbian National dentity.” Traditiones 45 (1): R Red S Club i th o I Djordjević,117–132. Ivan elja ekić. 2018. Is here Space for the Football nd olitical n Serbia.” Soccer & Society, 19(3):i R 355–372P “ t Left? Fans a P Positioning i . 174 on ------Politics the Football Field Ferguson, James. 1990. The olitics Machine: , Depoliticization nd tic Power in esotho. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityAnti-p Pr ‘Development’ a Bureaucra L Foer, ranklin. 2004. How Soccer Explainsess. he orld: an y Theory of Globalization. New York: Harper Collins. F t W Unlikel Gagnon, V.P. 2004. The Myth f Ethnic ar: Serbia nd n the 1990s. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. o W a Croatia i Glenny, ha. 1996. Fall of lavia: he hird alkan London: Pen Misc The Yugos T T B War. Goldblatt, avid. 2008.guin. The Ball is Round: a Global History of Football. iverhead ade pbk. ew ork: iverhead Books.D st 1 R tr ed. N Y R Jessica. 2006. nalism, Masculinity, in Nationalities Papers Greenberg,34(3): 321 1. “Natio and Multicultural Citizenship Serbia.” Greenberg, Jessica.–4 2010. “’There’s Nothing Anyone an o It’: articipation, Apathy nd Successful’ Transition n cialist Serbia.” Slavic ReviewC D 1):About 64. P a ‘ Democratic i Postso 69( 41– Hoberman, John. 1993. port nd deology in he Age.” In The Changing Politics of Sport, ed. n Manchester: anchester“S aUniversityI Pr t Post-communist Alliso Lincoln. Hobsbawm, Eric. M Nations and Nationalismess. Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality e: niversity 1992. . Cambridg Cambridge U Hughson,Press. arina. 2015. e očiglednog? Zašto je a teorija poluperiferijalnosti?.” u Kriminal i društvo Srbije, M H i“Otkrivanj Z S B potrebn z i soci loška traživanja. ur. Marina ughson oran tevanović. eograd: Institut a Jansen,kriminološka Stef. 2005. Antinacionalizamo is . B ograd: Biblioteka XX vek. Kovačić, avor. 2016. „Nogometni rofesionalcie druženom .” Časopis za suvremenu povijest 48 (1): 6 D p u u radu 7–95. 175 Ivan orđević ------Đ Malešević, iroslava. 5. “The ntroduction od eligion to s in bia and is)ing’ the Identity f Youth.”M Ethnologia200 Balkanica.I Journal for SoutheastR EuropeanState SchoolAnthropologySer 9: 225 ’Orthodox( o Serbian

Malešević Miroslava. 6.–239. lje kao srž ‘nacionalnog’ ičke rbije.” Svakodnevna kultura u postsocijalističkom200 periodu„Pravo slavu Srbiji i Bugarskoj, ur. Zoricabića Divac,postkomunist 99–121. Beograd:S Etnografski institut SANU. Mihailović, rećko. 1997. „Rat e počeo 13. maja 990.” : Rat je počeo na Maksimiru S i H 7 124. Beograd:S Medija centj 1 U , ur. Svetlana lapšak ari Štajner, 7– Mikuš, arek. 2011. ate Pride’:ar. Politics f BT ights Democratisation in an erbia’“. East European Politics andM Societies 25(4):“’St 704 9. o LG R and ’Europe S Mikuš, arek. 2013. “’European–1 ’ and its ‘Civil’ Beyond iberal es f Modernisation.” Centre for SoutheastM European Studies SerbiaWorking Paper Series 7Disconte. nts: L Narrativ o Mills, . 2016. “Cold War Football: t Defence and Yugoslav ttack ollowing he alin plit f EuropeRichard – Asia Studies 68(1 ): 1737 Sovie A f t Tito–St S o 1948”, Mills, hard 2009. “It ll Ended0 in n –41. Unsporting ay’: an Football the tion f Yugoslavia, ” RicInternational JournalA of the Historya of Sport 26W (9):Serbi and Disintegra o 1989–2006. 1187– Nielsen,1217. hristian xboe. 2010. he oalposts f a M L t R of Law.”C NationalitiesA Papers 38“T (1), G87 103. o Transition: Football as etaphor for Serbia’s ong Journey to he ule Nielsen, hristian xboe. 2013. tronger than– he tate? l olitical m and the Gay Pride in Serbia”.C SportA in Society 16(8):“S 1038–53. t S Footbal Hooliganism, P Extremis Parades Pavasovic Trost, nd Kovacevic 2013. Hooliganism and Nationalism: he eaction to erbia’s Parade n ReaderTamara, ommentarya Nikola Sport in Society“Football, 16 (8): 1054 T R S Gay i C Online.” 176 –76. on ------Politics the Football Field Riordan, ames. 1999. “The mpact of ommunism n sport.” in The International Politics of Sport in the 20th century, eds. ames RiordanJ and Arnd ruger.i ondonc – New York:o E & FN Routledge. J K L Spon: arina. 2014. Kosmopolitska čežnja: etnografija srpskog postsocijalizma. r za dije ulture Fakulteta Simić, M i Č Beograd: Centa Stu k Silber,političkih aura ndnauka llan Little.igoja. 1996. The Death of Yugoslavia. London: Pen L a A Spasić, Ivana. 2012.guin. Cosmopolitism as iscourse nd : A View from he emiperiphery. Revija a iju D a Performance t S z sociolog 41(3), Štiks Igor269–290. nd rećko orvat. 2015. Welcome to he esert f Socialism Radical Politics After Yugoslavia, London: Verso. a S H t D o Po st- Vrcan, Srđan. 2003. Nogomet – politika – nasilje: ogledi iz soc gije nogometa. Zagreb: a Jesenski urk. iolo Wilson, than. Naklehindad Curtain:i T ootball in Europe: Travels in Eastern European Football. Lo n: Orion. Jona 2006. B the F Eastern Wood, Shay. 2013. “Football ter Yugoslavia:ndo Conflict, a t R D Sport in Society 16 (8), 10 af Reconciliation nd he egional Football League ebate.” Zec, ejan iloš aunović. 77–1090.2015. “Football’s sitive on on n Diverse he e Study of DYugoslavia.”and M SoccerP & Society 16 (2–3): 236–7.Po Influence Integrati i Societies: T Cas

177 Scientific edition

Prospects for Anthropological Research in South-East Europe

Publisher: : N. N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia Institute of Ethnography of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia

Approved for publication By the Academic Council of the IEA RAS held on April 30th 2019 and accepted as volume no. 33 at the second meeting of the Editorial board of mono- graphs EI SASA held on May 16th 2019

Cover design: Photography by Aleksandar Kelić

Proofreading by Sonja Žakula

Подписано к печати 20.06.2019 Формат 70 х 108/16 Усл.печ. 11,3 Тираж 500 экз. Заказ № 159 Участок множительной техники Института этнологии и антропологии им. Н.Н. Миклухо-Маклая РАН 119991 Москва, Ленинский проспект, 32-А