Islam und Christentum zwischen Ablehnung und Verflechtung. Der Franziskaner-Zyklus von Ivo Andrić gelesen im Kontext seiner Dissertation

Abstract

Ivo Andrić is probably the most important Yugoslav author. His international reputation is constructed and then consolidated with the Nobel Prize in literature in 1961. Exactly this reputation was the reason for a one-sided reading of his works – especially the novel Bridge over Drina – by some Bosnian Muslim intellectuals, notably Šefkija Kurtović who criticized Andrić for his allegedly biased representation of Bosnia and its Muslim inhabitants. This critic was possible only in emigrant circles. Socialist Yugoslavia did not allow any attack on its canonised author, particularly the one which would touch upon carefully built national balance in Yugoslavian multinational society. Only the breakup of the land, followed by different wars for its heritage, made this criticism possible, even desirable. A series of articles appeared in diverse publications and it continues till these days. In the first part of my article I locate some of these texts and put them in the context of general Andrić-hatred. Particular interest is dedicated to the newest text “Andrićism. An Aesthetics for Genocide“ by Rusmir Mahmutćehajić. He accuses Andrić directly as a precursor of genocide committed on Bosnian Muslims. I can prove that his argumentation is personal, without support in any textual element. After that I examine two more texts. One of them is written by the historian Safet Bandžović and the other by the literary scholar Vedad Spahić. I show how their approach to Andrić is biased, too. Only after that it seems possible to develop a positive research strategy able to deal with a priori hostile attitude towards the great Yugoslav author. In order to do this I take Andrić’s dissertation into account first. It is a controversial text at least. In cautious analytic paces I try to free it from the ideological and political burden inflicted upon it later and read it in the context of its time, as one text that follows the ideology of Pan-Slavism in its Yugoslav variant. In such constellation it appears as a supplement to the literary text, first and foremost the loose shot stories collection which was christened Franciscan Cycle only later. My suggestion is that Andrić’s dissertation as well as his sporadic oral statements could be interpreted right if brought into a mutual dialog with all of his novels and stories dealing with Ottoman history of Bosnia. If we proceed this way we could see that the text seeming to be functional in the nation-building process appears as something that undermine it and, on the contrary, the literary texts that appear elusive are ideologically determined through the position of omniscient narrator. Andrić is the author of threshold who remains difficult to grasp in any form of unambiguousness.