POLITIKA SJEĆANJA: PARTIZANSKO SPOMEN-GROBLJE U MOSTARU

Autor: Ivana Ereš

Slojevitost komemorativnog „rituala“ Partizanskog spomen-groblja duboko je

povezana, kako s arhitektonskim elementima i simboličnim predstavama, tako i s
pokušajem prevrednovanja dotadašnjih praksi sjećanja ex-jugoslavenske zajednice.
Može se reći da je i sam proces gradnje ovog spomenika predstavljao svojevrsni
komemorativno-ritualni čin. Elementi ugrađeni u Bogdanovićevu arhitekturu nastali su
kao produkt interakcije koju autor opisuje kada kaže: „Pisao sam da bih umeo da
gradim, gradio sam da bih umeo da pišem“. Recipročan odnos gradnje i pisanja postaje
tako jedinstveni autorski čin memorijskog obilježavanja, kao i naknadne, nostalgične,
ali i kritičke refleksije.

U svom autobiografskom djelu Ukleti neimar, čiji naslov upućuje na sudbinsku

vezanost, kao i zagonetni odnos autora-graditelja prema vlastitoj gradnji, Bogdanović
konstatira kako Partizansko spomen-groblje u Mostaru, kao jedno od njegovih najboljih
„umnih i fizičkih snaga“, dakle još uvijek živa tvar i svježe sjećanje, doživljava sve
primjetnije degradiranje, fizičko oskvrnuće i simboličko, memorijsko nestajanje. Ukleti
neimar, pisan neposredno nakon završetka rata 90-ih, daje uvid u raspad čitavog jednog
političkog sustava, kao i raspad kozmopolitskog sustava vrijednosti, te propadanje
čitave jedne kulture sjećanja koja se temeljila na nadilaženju fašističkog, a u
Bogdanovićevu slučaju i konzervativnog komunističko-dogmatskog.

Spomen-groblje u vrijeme prije rata 90-ih predstavljalo je frekventnu točku

grada, duboku upisanu u gradsko tkivo, a prijeratni je komemorativni „ritual“ početnu
točku imao u urbanom dijelu grada odakle se pružao „čist“ pogled prema središnjem
dijelu kompleksa. „Organsko jedinstvo“ grada i memorijala svjedočilo je o
kompleksnom identitetu sjećanja, ali i projekciji utopijske, pacifističke budućnosti. U
poslijeratnom vremenu Partizansko spomen-groblje našlo se u potpuno drugom
društvenom kontekstu, demolirano i devastirano aktovima nacionalističkog nasilja,
izbrisano kao frekventna točka sjećanja. Uvidom u sadašnju situaciju, zapostavljenost
nekropole svjedoči o politikantskoj svakidašnjici grada koji se odriče vlastitog
identiteta, i stidi podsjećanja, refleksije i uvida koje razorena pozornica groblja pruža.
Stječe se dojam izmještenosti uslijed zaborava povijesti, kolektivističke, inducirane
amnezije.

Kada govorimo o komemorativnosti u periodu prije ratova 90ih mislimo na

pristupačnosti i otvorenosti kompleksa nekropole za upisivanje intimnih, personalnih
refleksija i stalnih interakcija živih stanovnika Mostara sa mrtvima. Rascjep između
prijeratnog i poslijeratnog komemorativnog „rituala“ ogleda se upravo u rascjepu
između individualnih praksi sjećanja, koje je aktivna scenična izloženost nekropole
poticala prekidajući sa konvencionaliziranim paradama, i „obreda“ posjeta mrtvima
često orkestriranih „odozgo“, od strane dužnosnika. Poslijeratna komemorativna praksa,
zasnovana na kanonima separacije i getoizacije sjećanja govori upravo o degradaciji
nekropolskih urbanih praksi koje su svjedočile o multietničkoj egalitarnosti prostora
ostvarenoj respektirajućim, interaktivno-memorijskim odnosom živih prema mrtvima.

Svo ideološko, religijsko ili militarističko znakovlje - koje je Bogdanović prije

svega postavljao u kozmološki kontekst, kako bi simbolički preinačio ratničku
zloupotrebu službene „državotvorne“ amblematike – ulazi u mikrokozmos Mostara koji
se temelji na zrcaljenju polisa – grada živih u nekropolisu – gradu mrtvih. Upravo kroz
aktivan odnos ova „dva“ grada, čak i nakon ratnog razaranja refleksivne prakse sjećanja
još uvijek opstaju.
 POLITICS OF REMEMBRANCE: PARTISAN MEMORIAL CEMETERY IN
MOSTAR
Author: Ivana Ereš
Architectural elements and symbolic portraits, as well as attempts to revaluate
memories of communities in ex-Yugoslavia are deeply connected to layers of
commemorative "ritual" of Partisan Memorial Cemetery in Mostar. It could be said that
the construction process of this monument represented a kind of commemorative ritual.
Elements installed in architecture of Bogdanović were a result of interaction which was
described by the author himself: "I wrote in order to build, I built in order to be able to
write." This way, reciprocal relationship between construction and writing became a
unique way to mark a memory, but alsoto mark additional nostalgic and critical
reflections.

In his autobiographical work titled "Ukleti neimar" Bogdanović states that Partisan
Memorial Cemetery in Mostar is going through notable abasement, physical sacrilege as
well as symbolic and memory disappearance. He continues that Memorial Cemetery in
Mostar is one of his best "mental and physical efforts", meaning it's still a living
substance and a fresh memory. The title of the book, which was written immediately
after the end of the 1990s war, refers to the deep bondage and mysterious relationship
between the author/builder and his own structure. "Ukleti neimar" gives us an insight
into the disintegration of one political system, as well as the canker of cosmopolitan
values and the decay of entire culture of remembrance, which was based on overcoming
all that is fascist, and in Bogdanović case conservative, communist and dogmatic.
Before the 1990s war, Memorial Cemetery was an important part of the city, an
urban zone. A pre-war commemorative ritual had its starting point in that part of the
city from where one could clearly see central part of the complex. Indigenous unity of
the city and its Memorial Cemetery witnessed a complicated identity of remembrance,
but it was also a projection of utopian and pacifist future. In the post-war period
Partisan Memorial Cemetery found itself in a completely different social context. It was
erased as a frequent zone of remembrance, and also vandalized and devastated by the
acts of nationalistic violence. After examining the current situation, it can be concluded
that neglected cemetery is a witness of political situation of a city where identity is
renounced, where its citizens are ashamed of their memory, self-reflection and query
thatare shown on a ruined cemetery stage. One gets the impression of displacement due
to collective, induced amnesia.

Commemoration ritual in pre-war Mostar, implied that accessibility and openness of

necropolis allowed engagement of most intimate and personal reflections, as well as
constant interaction between the living and the dead. There is a gap between pre-war
and post-war commemorative ritual, which can be seen in disruption between individual
practices of remembrance and the ritual of visiting the dead, which was often operated
by politicians and officials. Post-war commemorative practice is based on the canons of
separation and ghettoization of remembrance. This tells us that cemetery urban practices
which were a witness of multi-ethnic egalitarianism of space are degraded.

All ideological, religious and militaristic insignia exist in a small world of Mostar,
which is based on the reflection of polis - city of the living inside of necropolis - city of
dead. It is because of the relationship between these "two" cities that the reflective
remembrance practices, even after terrible war destructions, still subsist.