231 Mapping the revived Tradition: Continuity Requested and Rejected In Czech and Bulgarian Post-Totalitarian Experience Dessislava Velitchkova Dragneva School ofSlavonic and Eastern European Studies University ofLondon . A~cor~ing to ~ygmunt Bauman, the post-modem way of identIficatIon ]s charactenzed by the wish to hide one's identity by using different life strategies. The major difference between the post-modem and the modern identity, in his opinion, is that the latter could be depicted as a pilgrimage movement from one point to another, with the clear notion of what is before and ahead both in temporal and spatial dimensions. Even if it is an almost inarguable fact that the times of modernity are already part of the past, the longing for continuity is rather obvious, especial1y when post-communist cultures on their way to democratization are observed. Constant references to the pre-socialist democratic traditions are not only part of every politician's way of gaining trust, but are also a part of everyday conversations. 1The fact that in the pre-socialist period, selective references to the past were also common, creates an impression of continuity, interrupted by the socialist, i.e. foreign, rule. Thus, "tradition" was commonly accompanied by the word "revival" which stayed there only to stress that there was something to be revived. Interestingly enough, the prefix "re" usually appeared next to the noun "nationalism," depicting the unarguable exi tence of this phenomenon as "reemergence." In this way, not only the "positive" traditions of the past were underlined, but also negatively valued ones, such a nationalism, could find their excuse in the heritage from a foreign domination, suppre sing the "natural" wish for identification with a "nation" by replacing it with the vague idea of "international" society. As shown in the title, this paper will try to "map" the expressions of the attempts to "revive" the tradition in the post- communist Czech Republic and Bulgaria, and will search for the changes recognition and depiction of their common belonging to a "nation." Self-Stereotypes: Specificity and Differences Keeping in mind that the creation of stereotypes, like all cosmogonic mechanisms, follows similar models in all cultures, I will try to focus on the specific Czech and Bulgarian ones, and to point out their similarities and significant differences. As an illustration of the major self-depicting 1 This was extremely evident in the years immediately after 1989, when the .m~jor trend was towards achieving not only the public's trust, but mainly, towards achlevlOg identity through narratives, directed to the public. By identity here is meant not .o.nly the public's wish to identify with a larger group, but also as t~e .method ~f polItIcal legitimization of different parties, which have been employing SiImilar techmques. 232 differences, one could use even the two nations' typical "national characters"-Svejk and Baj Ganjo-both created at the turn of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, the period when the national idea was already shaped (even if the Czechs still had not created their nation-state) and an image concentrating all typical characteristics of the nation was needed. I And if B. Anderson's assertion of the role of the printed press is also taken into account, the comparison might become more telling about the differences between the two ways of imagining the group.2 Svejk and Baj Ganjo are both literary characters-expressions of the respective group's awareness of belonging to the same group. In the Bulgarian case, there are already prescriptions for what should be changed in order for a representative from the group not to be ashamed of his Bulgariannness. Nevertheless, the two symbols function in the same way-by giving a negative example, the Bulgarians have the chance of creating the sense of belonging "against"-a line of thoughts cultivated by generation after generation of literary analysts. But even without the help of the analysts, the fact that people could make the difference between the protagonists-Baj Ganjo and the intellectuals•automatically allowed them to identify themselves with the second one, which contributed to their feeling of being "educated" and "cultured." On the other hand, the constantly cheerful and Svejk, who survives in al1 situations, is commonly interpreted as an expression of Czechs' viability and resistance to all changes that might happen. Thus, his open idiocy is commonly interpreted as deliberate pretending. In this way, notwithstanding the fact that these were two different characters, pointing at different characteristics of the respective group, the way their images functioned was rather similar. They contributed to the perception of the two groups as "educated" and "cultured" ones,3 which led them to the conclusion that even if there were certain negative features that the Czechs or Bulgarians as individuals might have, the group as a nation could have only positive connotations. Similarities are found in the way that the sense of belonging to the same nation is strengthened by populist discourses describing each culture as having a special position not only geographically, but also culturally. This is expressed mainly through self-describing metaphors using the words "bridge," "cross-road," "gateway," "centre," position in the "heart of," or in the "middle of." This specificity added to the conviction of their characteristics not only as "educated" and "cultured" people, but also as people who were always ruled by intellectuals.4 2 3 In "The Little Czech and the Great Czech Nation," L. Holy points out that when asked about the specific characteristics of Czechs as individuals, most of the people mentioned negative characteristics (envious, greedy, lazy, etc.). At the same time, when asked about the characteristics of their nation, their answers were mainly in the positive register, ascribing all the negative characteristics to the other nations (some of the characteristics pointed out were even exactly the same); the same way of distinguishing between individuals and nation is typical for Bulgarians. 4 See L.Holy, op. cit, for more detailed analysis of Czech self-stereotypes as "cultured"; to him also belongs the conclusion that the Czechs have the idea of people who are always ruled by intellectuals. 233 The image of the nation as "educated" and "cultured" in the two cases was strengthened by the constant references to the pre-socialist democ at' traditions and through thes.e traditions~to the "golden age" of the respe~ti~~ cult~re. T~e latter was Interpr~ted dIfferently, depending on what was conSIdered Important to be underlIned. Thus, the public pointed to charismatic figures such as S1. .Wencelaus, C:harles IV, Jah Hus, Palacky, T. G. Masaryk, Colonel Svec, or, In the Bulganan case, Tzar [King] Simeon, Kl. Ohridski p~triarch Evtimii, B~tev, Levsk~, KaraveJ.ov, Stambolov. Depending on th~ dlffer~nt pu~oses, dIfferent penods of hIstOry were underlined, selectively . reduc~ng the l~po~ance ~f the ?thers. The predictable result of this special attentIon that IS paId.to hIStOry IS, ~f course, the over-stress on nationality.5 The common pattern IS the constructIon of the history of the respective nation from the point of view of the contemporary period. Charismatic Figures-Continuity and Discontinuity The beginning of the changes (roughly since 1992) was marked by opposing the cult figures of the preceding period and raising cults towards new "martyrs." Still, some of the cults continued even during communist rule, and the newly created cults, which were the same as those banned during communism, followed the same models of creation as the most prevalent ones. For example, among the reintroduced cults are those that belong to Masaryk, which is logically followed by the reintroduction of the cults towards Palacky and Hus.6 By adopting Palacky's motto "Byli jsme pred Rakouskem, budem i po nem" ["We were here before Austria, we will be here after it"], he stressed the continuity not only in Czech history as such, but he also supported the impression of communication between different generations of historians and intellectuals. The fact that many of Masaryk's works were republished after 1989 supported not only the conviction of continuity of Czech history, but also could lead to the wishful interpretation of the same motto. The motto is interpreted as a proof that not only the Czechs resisted one foreign domination, successfully creating a democratic state afterwards, but they also survived a second, in the particular period interpreted as an even more devastating one. In addition, as Rokyta points out, Masaryk incarnates the cults towards Hus, Zizka, George of Podebrad, and Comenius, in this way underlining only continuity, because these were the figures he considered worth admiring in Czech history. 7 The idea of Czech as a democratic nation is also connected with the cult towards Dubcek. The two cults fulfilled different requirements to 5 Or, as L. Holy asserts, "Nationalism is a discursive agreement that history matters, without necessarily agreement on what it is and what it means." p. 13. 6 By "logically," here I mean that the one who introduced the cult to Hus In the nation-building period was Palacky. Masaryk was the one who created the cult to Palacky. 7 Quoted in Pynsent, Questions of Identity: Czech and Slovak Ideas ofNatlOnaltty and Personality, pp. 193-4. 234 hagiographic genres, which is not so substantial, taking into consideration the imilar way in which they functioned. 8The fact that the two name. thelnselves, connected with the word "liberty," formed one of the slogans during the demonstrations that were held during the velvet revolution there, with no need whatsoever to add something to it or explain this slogan, is telling of the significance of the two figures.