aeer.indb The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 85 The Challenges of Applied Ethnology in Croatia Tvrtko zebec institute of ethnology and folklore research, zagreb, croatia The tradition of folklore festivals in Croatia has roots in the festivals of peasant culture from the end of the 1920s and the second part of the 1930s, when the cultural, edu- cational and charitable association Peasant Harmony with its populist ideology attempted to inspire self-confidence in peasants, gradually enlighten them, and introduce them to the national political life. Back then already, peasant culture festival expert juries consisted of intellectuals— ethnographers, folklorists, musicologists and musicians. Giving advice and recommendations, they created cultural policy at that time and tried to shape national identity by promoting peasant, old, domestic culture but from their urban point of view. [1] Since that model of showing earlier native place tradi- tions became entrenched as being successful, it has been expected that experts at the festivals evaluate the programs and the quality of the performances by the individual groups. Unlike the then-dominant evolutionary view of the development of folk music—from oj-singing as the most simple (and, thus, oldest form) to the most highly developed major key part singing—the uniform source of Croatian dance has not been so easy to establish. Because of its broad dissemination and simplicity, the kolo circle- dance is accepted as a general symbol of national unity and community, while particular dances such as the drmeš, staro sito, dučec, poskočica and potkolo are regarded as being specificities according to regional diversities (Ceribašić 1998:121). Couple dances—the polka, valcer, mazurka, čardaš, šotiš, tango, fokstrot and the like—were not readily accepted by professionals since they showed the influence of urban and non-Croatian centres, and even when they were performed at festivals as an exception to the rule, they were not favourably evaluated. The analy- sis of the repertoires of groups that appeared long after the first Peasant Harmony festivals—at the International Folklore Festival in Zagreb (from 1966 onwards)—shows that these dances, apart from at the first few Festivals, were rarely seen on the stages of the Festival right up until the 1980s (Sremac 1978:109). Dance gradually penetrated the singing festivals of peasant culture from the mid-1930s. After World War II, it was increasingly represented on festival stages. On the one hand, dance became more significant in relation to the older music tradition because of its dynamic nature (Marošević 1988:83). On the other, due to the fact that socialist society suppressed the national and the specifi- cally local, while promoting the supraregional and supra- national, dance became the sole area in which any contact whatsoever was permitted with the features of the old and the domestic (Ceribašić 1988:184). This non-verbal form became the most appropriate means of communication under socialism, since, according to the ruling ideology of that time, traditional singing or presentation of particular customs (unavoidably linked with the Roman Catholic cal- endar), as had been customary at peasant culture festivals between the two world wars, placed too much emphasis on peasant, national and traditional religious culture. For different ideological reasons, stage presentation of folk music and, particularly, dance, developed throughout the world after World War II. It was recognised in that international context as one of the ways that, by promo- tion of national culture at festivals that often had a com- petitive character, one could also promote understanding between peoples and cultures (Buckland 2002:71). Professional juries evaluate the authentic and repre- sentative nature of the individual stage presentations. One could not say that they are of one mind as regards a uniform definition of authenticity. Still, a dominant view is imposed in public by which the best are proclaimed and distinguished. Thus, the basic idea of such competi- tive festivals is brought into question. The basic problem lies in the multifold interests and power concealed in the conception of authenticity, which is experienced in various ways by those who participate in the festivals in any way whatsoever, so that instead of better understanding, there are feelings of doubt, confusion and jealousy (Buckland 2002:71–74). Although no festivals with a marked competitive char- acter are held in Croatia, the very idea of public perfor- mance at reviews and festivals is, in essence, competitive. Even when the members of the professional juries are against the idea of proclaiming the best, particularly on the principle of first, second, and third place, the partici- pants themselves expect and demand public comments on and evaluations of their performances. The “best” folk groups are selected at small local or regional reviews and they represent their district or region at the larger countywide festivals. The groups that will perform at the largest regional and state festivals are selected at these local reviews. A performance at the International Folk- lore Festival held in Zagreb is regarded as proof that an individual group has met the most important criteria of Allen Typewritten Text © 2004 Tvrtko Zebec All Rights Reserved The copyright for individual articles in both the print and online version of the Anthropology of East Europe Review is retained by the individual authors. They reserve all rights to the text. Please email the managing editor for details on how to contact these authors. Permission is granted for reproducing these articles for scholarly and classroom use as long as only the cost of reproduction is charged to the students. Commercial reproduction of these articles requires the permission of the authors. 86 Tvrtko Zebec The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 authenticity. The hierarchies of the festivals were set by the Peasant Harmony organization back in the period between the two world wars. After performances at local and regional reviews, they invited their branches to the largest review, the Festival of Croatian Peasant Culture in Zagreb, as the national and political centre. That festival tradition has been revived and continued from 1966 onwards, since which time the International Folklore Festival in Zagreb has been considered to be Croatia’s most respected Festival, within the circle of people engaged in this form of creativ- ity. Accordingly, that is, since the holding of the Peasant Harmony festivals, the “regional festivals offer a somewhat different picture than the representative Zagreb Festival. The large number of local events made it impossible for professionals to review the programs ahead of time, so that there are elements here that did not have entry to the Fes- tival in Zagreb. Dances and songs of the newer tradition are performed, despite the efforts of experts that identical programme objectives are also implemented here…The professionals selected the groups and repertoire here, too, and each selected group was obliged to meet in the finest detail the demands of the professionals” (Sremac 1978:105) [emphasis T.Z.]. [2] After World War II, a more prominent place in the expert juries at important folklore festivals was given to individual ethnochoreologists/choreographers, along with other ethnologists, ethnomusicologists and folklorists. Even today, there is a tendency to follow the model of folklore festival expert committees. From the 1990s it has become common in the city of Zagreb and in several neighbouring counties for the jury to consist of three members—one music expert, one expert for traditional costumes, and one for the dance. Fellow ethnomusi- cologists from the Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Research usually comment on music, ethnologists from the Ethnographic Museum or local museums observe traditional costumes, and the dance is commented on by ethnochoreologists. In the event that any of these experts is unable to come, long-time and experienced musicians or leaders from the Lado professional folk dance ensemble, or from the amateur folk ensembles, are invited to attend in their place. As soon as the festival ends, it is the task of the jury to comment on individual performances and make sugges- tions to the end of “improved” progress, each member of the jury from his/her aspect. Subsequently, they have to hand in the same, written, evaluations to the organiser of the festival, who then copies and sends them to all the groups that performed at the festival. Although the comments of jury members can be similar from the expert viewpoint, they can also be very differ- ent, which of course depends on the views and attitudes of individual members. The Contemporary Kermis on the Stage As a member of the jury, I observed the local folklore festival in Velika Gorica, a town near Zagreb, in May 2000. The festival brings together about ten folklore groups from surrounding areas. The group whose performance inspired this paper fosters a highly characteristic singing style. Their repertoire is extremely rich—ranging from lots of traditional, very archaic songs that are sung around St. George’s Day or at harvest-time, to wedding songs and popular church songs that also maintain traditional sing- ing style in their melodics and style of performance. The traditional costumes that the singers wear for their perfor- mances are taken care of in great detail, and attention is also paid to the musical accompaniment. For the several past years, the art director of the group has been a former dancer of the Lado professional ensemble, who repeatedly emphasized that he decided to lead this group precisely because he wanted to preserve their characteristic singing style. I was delighted by their performance at that local festi- val. For the first time in my “professional life” I witnessed a group successfully presenting a contemporary kermis—a kermis that is going on to this day at feasts, patron-saint feast days of certain towns and villages. This is how I evaluated the contemporariness: several older women and men were dressed in contemporary, everyday clothes, while they sang in their traditional, characteristic way, a song to St. Roch (Rocco)—a non-tra- ditional composition by a highly regarded and esteemed composer. That composer has been a long-time leader of a women’s vocal group Ladarice (a part of Lado ensemble), who has been taking note of popular songs, complet- ing and interpreting them for several decades, and then composing completely new songs, that, according to their melodics, rhythm and style, greatly resemble traditional songs. The Ladarice perform most of his compositions at the regional Krapina Festival of Songs in the local Kajka- vian dialect. The drmeš dance (Croatian folk dance) and the polka, “naturalized” about a hundred years ago, were incorporated in the performance in a traditional way, as they are performed at present in the majority of dance events in that area, just as was done in the recent and most distant past. I expressed particular satisfaction in evaluation of this performance because they “created an extraordinarily good impression of the contemporary nature of the kermis in their representation. I had not previously witnessed such an attempt and that is why I especially liked this approach. If one takes into consideration the selection of contemporary composed songs from the Krapina Festival, the contemporariness can be noticed as much in the black clothes of several women as in the music…The idea and the challenges of applied ethnology in croatia 87 The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 its implementation are worth attention, and could be an interesting move forward in opening up stage representa- tions to new ideas and approaches. (Why should we always have to look at the attempts to show the oldest attainable layer of folklore, when we also live it in our own way today?) According to that logic, the performers were very authentic in their performance!” (Zebec 2000:2) Quite by chance on that occasion, one of the members of the jury for evaluation of the music was the composer’s brother, who was quite sceptical about the performance, precisely because his brother’s composition was performed, and he also expressed his concern as to whether they had asked for the permission to perform it. Since the leader of that folk group is a former Lado dancer, a good friend of the composer in question, every doubt about the performance without permission was rejected. According to one of the older members of the group, during that year, the year 2000, the group was somewhat more dedicated to practising church popular songs. Their intention was to sing at their traditional kermis on St. Bartholomew’s Day. Their leader did not know any of the songs dedicated to St. Bartholomew, but he taught them the mentioned song to St. Roch. Members of the group knew that they could not sing the song for St. Roch at St. Bartholomew’s kermis, so they suggested to the leader to incorporate the learnt song in a staged representation of the kermis. The main kermis in their village is on St. Bartholomew’s Day, but it is a custom to go to kermis fairs in other villages—for example to the famous Croatian shrine of Marija Bistrica. In addition, many women from their village, and traditionally whole families made pledges in the Church of St. Roch (August 16) in a nearby village, where they used to go on a pilgrimage in horse-drawn carts in the past, but travel by car in present times. That was also the reason why the idea of the staged representa- tion of the kermis of St. Roch seemed close to them and they felt it to be their own. Referring to the authorship of the song, the comment of the singers/dancers in the group was as follows: “How could the composer hold against us the fact that we per- formed his composition, when he came to us many times, taking notes of the songs that we sang to him. I guess we can perform one of his compositions in return!” A year later, in September 2001, during the Vinkovačke jeseni–Vinkovci Autumn folklore festival that brings together groups at the national level, this group performed the same act. After I came to the open stage where the main per- formance was being held that evening, members of the group called me in agitation and confusion, asking me what they should do since the crew from Croatian Televi- sion, who were filming the entire festival, warned them at the dress rehearsal that no one was allowed to go on stage in everyday clothes and perform without traditional costumes. Their leader raised his objections and, since I supported them, they decided that they would not give up on their idea. During their performance, a fellow ethnolo- gist, the TV producer, my colleague from university who was sitting next to me in the audience, did not hide his indisposition and anger because of such a performance. He immediately said that their performance would not be shown in the later broadcast of the event—that he would simply cut it out from the programme. He cited everyday clothes as one of his reasons and as another—the fact that they performed a composition by a contemporary com- poser. In answering the question of why he did not like the performance, he answered that it was very inarticulate and unclear. Dominant Attitudes and Objections Two or three weeks after the Vinkovci Autumn Festival, when experts in the field of ethnology, folklore research, anthropology, ethnomusicology and ethnochoreology, who mostly study folklore festivals or simply observe them, met at the public panel about the Zagreb International Folklore Festival. The art director of the festival presented her concept and view of the festival, and, among other, the subject under discussion was the performance of the representation of the contemporary kermis. Based on her ten-year experience in organization of thematic folklore festivals, the director of the Zagreb Festival stated that she has reached the conclusion that the best solution was to ask the groups to perform representa- tive, old, domestic folklore. Contemporary representations should be avoided, because that would open a Pandora’s box of inappropriate folklore performances, and it would be difficult to put an end to the new “invented” perfor- mances. The quite often emphasized negative attitude of experts, ethnologists and folklorists, was in the back- ground of their views about Lado dancers as choreog- raphers, creating choreographies on the basis of their superficial knowledge, acquired in the Lado ensemble or at short-term workshops on the folk dance of certain regions, and not according to sound folklore material. Various views were expressed by the fellow experts dur- ing the panel discussion. They ranged from the acceptance of the attitude about the need for presenting the old and domestic, to the question on whether the creativity of the individual and the need to express individual, but also collective, identity should be suppressed. An established, experienced ethnomusicologist, a professor and a member of the Academy, pointed out that 100 years ago there had also been compositions that were, with time, accepted as being “folk” (traditional), and that he felt that the per- 88 Tvrtko Zebec The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 formers shouldn’t be suppressed: “We shouldn’t be afraid, because as experts, we can always say when we feel that the border of the appropriate has been crossed, and react in appropriate way.” The fact is that our sense of the borders of the “appro- priate” is very personal and individual, and how much this attitude will be imposed as a model or a rule, which others also have to respect, depends on the position of the individual. In the announcements of the Vinkovci Autumn Festival, it was emphasized several times that the festival in ques- tion is the largest national festival of original folklore. In the later broadcast of that Festival, the performance of the group with the contemporary representation of the kermis was left out. It is likely that the expert panel concerning the Zagreb International Folklore Festival was sufficient confirmation for the TV producer to stick to his views and simply leave out that single performance from the broadcast. By doing so, his expert evaluation publicly belittled and degraded the contemporary staged representation of the kermis and indicated to the leader and the members of that group, as well as to everyone who watched that festival live and noticed the omission of that act in the TV broadcast, that such performances were not welcome at the Vinkovci Autumn, the largest national original folk fes- tival. Due to the power of the media, his decision has also superseded the decision of the experts who had chosen that group to perform at the festival. The traditional festival model has continued, with the most attention being paid to the product, that is, what is shown and performed. The focus here is on the model itself rather than on the style of the performance. Not much heed is given to who is performing something, and why. Apart from the exceptionally pronounced wish of the performers to appear at any price at the Zagreb Festival, the leading festival in the land, their perception of folklore is largely marginalized and/or conditioned by the concept of authenticity. Thanks to that conception “with time they learnt what the experts were expecting of them and what type of festival programme was preferred” (Vitez 2001:176). To perform at the Zagreb Festival and on the “small screen,” they are prepared to accept all the advice given and to fulfil all the conditions, even if they have to learn something that is no longer the vital tissue of their culture, but, according to notations, was so several decades ago. However, that does not mean that they do not recog- nize themselves in programmes selected in this way. To the contrary, they frequently accept them and thus themselves participate in the construction of authenticity and “man- age to shape their own specific performance within it,” with it becoming “a contemporary aesthetic conception and contemporary practice which leans on conceived, for- mer practice.” Still, there is no doubt that their role in this process is not the decisive one (Ceribašić 1998:196–197). It is obvious that what counts today is concept of authenticity (originality) at the level of application and practice (Vitez 2001:176). This has emerged in the applica- tion of ethnology “as a simplified instruction for recogni- tion of the content of traditional culture that is desirable for nurture and presentation at festivals” (ibid.). That concept has been subjected to considerable criticism over the past three decades but has, nevertheless, endured, and has not been shown to be so worthless from the point of theory as it might seem. In her criticism, Naila Ceribašić, too (1998:195), has sought for the reasons of the survival of the originality canon. As a social fact, it “makes up the foundation of the discourse on contemporary festi- vals—perhaps because it can offer sanctuary to fragmented identities with its stability, unchanging nature, purity and collectivity, helping in the building of the grand ideas of national or State unity, or even because it can make the engagement of professional experts really essential with its elusiveness and fictional elements.” By prescribing originality, experts and organizers can thus participate in showing quite non-binding local and regional identity, just as they consciously or unconsciously can be participants in the creation of the ethnomyth (Rihtman-Auguštin 2001). In that way, they also share accountability for the social, political, aesthetic, cultural and even economic consequences (Buckland 2002:75–76). However, standards in the world of music are some- what different. Immediately after the emergence within the framework of popular music of the world music genre, which takes its models from traditional music from all parts of the world, the International Folklore Festival was promoting that mode of music expression in Croatia. It was recognized as providing an opportunity that urban young people, too, accept forms of national, traditional music adapted to suit the taste of contemporary consum- ers. That was also a way of attracting to the events and concerts of the Festival the young urban public, to whom these artists and music were familiar and very accept- able. It seems that this time, in keeping with mainstream trends—after the first earlier attempts as part of the ideas of the Peasant Harmony organization to find forms of national culture that would unite the urban and peasant populations—a spontaneous acceptance by young urban dwellers of new expressions of traditional, peasant music took place during the 1980s. However, the background to the interest of young people in world music was not the desire to shape a common national entity and awareness, since that had long existed; rather, this was a search for their own roots and heightened awareness of the search for a healthy life, a return to Nature of sorts. It was also, quite probably, a search for the exotic which, in relation the challenges of applied ethnology in croatia 89 The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 to the ideas of the universal contemporary music of our “global village,” can still be found in the specifics of ethnic cultures and traditions. The symbols that had in their time carried the burden of the exclusively elevated objectives of national homogenisation “descended” to the level of contemporary everyday life, and in that way also became indicators of cultural complexity (Rihtman-Auguštin 2001:17; Frykman 1995). [3] Despite the top-flight attainments of the specialist events of the Festival, which require studious work and comments from which the broad public can learn a lot about the diversity and richness of traditional culture, primarily as seen through the eyes of experts, it is obvious that the concept of authenticity has still not undergone any fundamental changes. The part of cultural complexity shown in the form of modern music expression should not be a counterpoise to the customary, “sterile” performances of folk groups and proof of the contemporary nature of the Festival. Instead, re-examination of the entrenched canons of authenticity and practical application of scholarly delib- eration could ease the contentiousness between scholar- ship and its application in practice. In other words, to whatever extent the unforgettable youth of the older members of the folk groups is recon- structed on stage, the common experience for the younger generation is singing, dancing, and playing, which is more important to them from the aspect of entertainment and travel than pride in their own village culture and the need to preserve it (Dubinskas 1982:113). Today’s perform- ers are far more participants in contemporary cultural processes and experience dance in their everyday, personal lives “as teenagers who live in that town today,” than they are aware of the transmission of tradition which once lived in some first existence (Nahachewsky 2001:24–25). The analysis carried out by Nahachewsky on the examples of the Morris dances in Great Britain and the Salonsko kolo dance in Croatia and in Chile lead to his conclusion that changes and adaptation occur in life, resulting in what was regarded in the past as a second existence, having today the features of the first existence of folklore. A question imposes itself in connection with the example given above of a stage presentation of a saint’s day fête event: is it exclusively the older stratum of tradi- tion that can be representative, or can the ways in which own identity is shaped also encompass quite new artistic attainments? In defining folk music, Grozdana Marošević claimed that the non-existence of awareness of an author is not a crucial standard for locating music content as a part of folklore. According to her, time is the crucial element in judging whether music content is folklore, or, in other words, how long these contents have existed as folklore, and whether they have become tradition. “New music contents which are folkloristic by their performing characteristics, but which have not (yet) become a part of tradition, are not regarded by the majority of people as being folk music” (Marošević 1988:78). However, the conception of authenticity, tradition and heritage cannot be interpreted exclusively as a remnant of the past in the present. Also involved are the ways in which one’s own source is defined and felt, and how one’s own identity is built. Other factors are the notions, conceptions and feel- ings about how our forebears lived, which can collide with the reality of their way of life (Ceribašić 1998:215). There is also the matter of the need of the performers publicly to show the feelings that they had been obliged to conceal for political reasons. Namely, everyone who is at least vaguely familiar with the half-century long rule of the commu- nist regime in which the Croatian Roman Catholics lived, similarly to believers of other denominations in the for- mer socialist Yugoslavia (along with many other nations under communist regimes), clearly understands that the wish for ultimate freedom in public confession of one’s faith contributed to direct and public expression on stage of this long-suppressed religious identity of the individual and of the community, within the framework of folklore representations. So the subject of presentation at festivals need not necessarily be exclusively a product. Along with what is performed, one should also look at how it is performed, and who performs it. One should not ignore the notions held about this by the performers, notions they regard as being important. Taking all those components into account, it is easier, on the basis of their mutual perme- ation, to penetrate deeper into the social and cultural sense and significance of a performance. This does not call into question the traditional shaping of the programmes of groups that present native place tradition, which must undoubtedly continue to be the core and main content and sense of festivals. Instead, an effort is being made to point to the unnecessary exclusivity of representative nature standards. A Host of Examples and Questions The analysis and interpretation of a performance by the folk-dance group from the village of Oriovac (near the town of Slavonski Brod) at the International Folklore Festival in Zagreb in 1992—within the existing concep- tion of authenticity (to remain consistent)—showed the desire during the time of war (1991–1992) to stress national unity and to be a symbol of resistance towards the aggressor. At the same time, it also revealed tensions in the political sense—the attitude towards the national centre of political power, and the resentment at its ineffectiveness in defending Srijem, Slavonia, and Oriovac, too, against the attacks (Zebec 1998:152–156). [4] 90 Tvrtko Zebec The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 Analysis of another example—the performance by inhabitants of the village of Jarmina at the Vinkovci Autumn festival in 1995—in a different, arranged form, in an authored choreography, also showed the problems of contemporary life among people who had already lived for 50 years (in the third generation) in Slavonia—in the eastern part of Croatia, preserving and displaying the identity of their place of origin in western Croatia (Zebec 1998:156–162). They were not sufficiently self-confident and skilful themselves to put on stage the dances of their old native region, adhering to the conception of authen- ticity, but they felt the need publicly to express their “old” regional identity, since they had felt like second-class citizens in their “new” community, under a half-century of pressure from the regime and new surroundings. They engaged a female choreographer from their earlier home to conceive the dances and songs as a memento of the region from which they came. Their feelings were intensi- fied, which perhaps also gave an additional stimulus for emphasising their old identity, by the fact that during the war (1991–1992) they suddenly were obliged to move because of the situation and many of them, as displaced persons from Jarmina, were accommodated with their kin- folk in the Zagorje region, from where they moved during World War II. They felt the need finally and in public to present themselves in the guise of their old homeland and show that they were as worthy as the even older settlers in Slavonia. A folk group of Croatians from Srijemska Mitrovica (from eastern Srijem, in Serbia) performed at the Vinkovci Autumn festival in 2001. They showed the heritage of Sri- jem. The performers wore costumes that they themselves had reconstructed according to the models that some of their parents had owned in the period between the two world wars. This was the type of costume worn in Croatian Posavina, which could not be regarded as representing Srijem according to the existing canons on authenticity. Someone objected along these lines after the performance, but the question arises as to why they chose the costume that served as the model for reconstruction. It should be born in mind here that the singing, charity and drama societies of the citizens of Mitrovica, along with people from the other towns at that time, were divided along national lines, and that the Croatians took costumes from Croatia as their national symbols. So it is probable that the selected model had survived in someone family heritage. Is that any reason to ignore those circumstances in the lives of the performers and their awareness of identity, insisting now they don costume which would have more to say to others (largely to experts) about Srijem as their broad native region? [5] A Croatian married couple from eastern Srijem driven out of Slankamen during the 1990s are aware of the important role played by folklore activities in their inclu- sion in the social life of Gradina in Podravina (in Croatia), to which they moved. In addition, they are conscious of the integrational potential inherent in presentation of diverse folklore: That man from Srijem practises not only the local but also the dances of the broad region at the local folklore society, including those from Dalmatia (there are people in the area who are descendants of Dalmatian settlers), while he also learns dances typical to other parts of Slavo- nia and to Voyvodina, for performance at the Slavonian Folklore Festival. His efforts in presentation of the folklore of the population that is heterogeneous in origin, speech and traditions seems to be a targeted move, which will help both in incorporating the people from Srijem in the reception society and in the multicultural environ- ment in which they live (Čapo Žmegač 2002:105). The reasons cited in these few examples seem to provide sufficient rationale for expanding the existing festival can- ons. An endless number of examples could be given, since each group that wants to perform has valid reasons in the background for wanting to do so. It is up to the experts to try to understand them. Final Remarks Instead of a conclusion, several remarks and questions occur to me. From the critical perspective, many expert evaluations and decisions—the ones from the past and the ones that are contemporary—can be characterized as the views of individual experts who are in a position at a particular moment to exercise the duty of, for example, art direc- tor of a certain festival, or TV producer. Depending on the moment and the position, that is, the power of these individuals, their opinion is more or less imposed on the expert and cultural, and consequently, social public. This is how certain stereotypes are formed, which are perpetu- ated within the profession and public opinion, and are accepted by the common man—who reacts with great sensitivity and adapts to the ruling social and political conditions. That is why it is necessary in discussions on authenticity to ask whose authenticity is in question (Bakka 2002:69). How is it that our individual and/or collective author- ity can be imposed on others, and how much “stronger” is this than the individual idea of a choreographer or the needs of a particular folklore group that had recognized and accepted the idea of an individual for expression of a particular identity? Do we have an exclusive right as experts to impose our views, or should we be more sensi- tive in recognizing the needs that the observed groups express (see Davies 2001:15)? the challenges of applied ethnology in croatia 91 The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 Professionalism is sought and emphasized. However, a profession is not in itself an institution that cannot be sub- mitted to criticism—it is, in fact, the representation of the experts themselves, who sometimes err in evaluating the relationship of their own professionalism and their own discoursive practice (Guillory 1993:59). [6] The unques- tionable stance of the profession is, in fact, a one-sided experiencing of interaction. According to the first described example, time will show how possible it will be to accept the authorship of an indi- vidual, a composer, as being collective—will the song to St. Roch be accepted with time in that village, owing to the staged representation? And is this at all important? Can one “invented and inarticulate” staged presentation be rep- resentative for a particular community during a particular period of social and political life? Endnotes 1 Written works on folklore festivals in Croatia include Sremac 1978; Dubinskas 1982; Marošević 1988; Ceribašić 1992. Analysing folk music practices and cultural policy, Naila Ceribašić (1998) wrote at length about the festi- val paradigms in Croatia through their history. Theresa Buckland (2002) also wrote about the series of oppositions built into the folk paradigm framework in some British examples. 2 From my own experience as a member of juries at local and county festivals, I can say that this method of selection at the smaller festivals for groups to perform at the larger ones has largely survived up until the present day. The organizers expect the experts to evaluate the per- formances and to select the groups for the larger regional festivals. 3 That does not mean that the need for expression of national identity has been lost, nor that it will be lost, since. At the time of the Homeland War, the Zagreb Festival was an expression of resistance to the anti-Croatian aggression (Vitez 1992; Zebec 1998), “while its participants insisted that the Festival be held, despite the wartime dangers and other unfavourable circumstances” (Vitez 1996:7). Thus, national symbols are displayed, either prominently or less so, depending on the current social situation. For example, a sensitivity towards national minorities was shown at the 2003 Festival, when the entire theme of the Festival was the heritage of Croatia’s national minorities. 4 Slavonska Posavina [the Sava River Basin] and the surroundings of Slavonski Brod, even after the many cease- fires signed during the war in 1991 and 1992, were con- stantly under Serbian attack from the southern, Bosnian side of the River Sava. Members of the folklore groups wanted to come at that time and from that region to the Festival in Zagreb. With their presentation, a special per- formance of the sung kolo, Slavonia at War, prepared for the occasion, they wanted to draw greater public attention to the situation. Analysis of the dance event along with the results of a questionnaire handed out to the perform- ers, the participants in that political ritual, showed that the kolo, as one of the very archaic forms of expression, was being adapted to contemporary life and was transmitting up-to-date messages about the war and political reality. 5 Something similar could also be said about the Croatians who gather at the Catholic missions and clubs outside of Croatia, in Europe, and in Americas, Australia and New Zealand. As emigrants, they have completely different notions about their old homeland, the symbolics are at different levels from those that are entrenched in Croatia, their country of origin, while they have few pos- sibilities to engage in folklore that would meet the criteria of the authenticity that has been discussed. 6 Following Magali Scarfatti Larson (The Rise of Profes- sionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977) John Guillory has opened up the larger question of the relation between the professional and the bureaucratic. Larson points out that while the profession has always been represented as “the antithesis of bureaucracy,” all professions are now “bureaucratised to a greater or lesser extent,” and further, “in a bureaucratised world, professions can no longer be interpreted as inher- ently anti-bureaucratic!” (Guillory 1993:253) References Bakka, Egil 2002 “Whose Dances, Whose Authenticity.” Laszlo Felfoldy, Theresa Buckland (editors). Authen- ticity—Whose Tradition?, Budapest: Euro- pean Folklore Institute, 60–69. Buckland, Theresa Jill 2002 “Multiple Interests and Powers: Authenticity and the Competitive Folk Dance Festival.” Laszlo Felfoldy, Theresa Buckland (editors). Authenticity—Whose Tradition?, Budapest: European Folklore Institute, 70–78. Ceribašić, Naila 1992 “Smotre folklora kao oblikovatelji identiteta glazbenofolklornog područja Slavonije.” 26. Međunarodna smotra folklora, Zagreb: Kon- certna direkcija, 19–25. 1998 Folklorna glazbena praksa i kulturna politika: paradigma smotri folklora u Hrvatskoj. Doctoral dissertation, Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Filozofski fakultet. Čapo Žmegač, Jasna 2002 Srijemski Hrvati: etnološka studija migracije, identifikacije i interakcije. Zagreb: Durieux. 92 Tvrtko Zebec The Anthropology of East Europe Review Volume 22 • Number 1 • Spring 2004 Davies, Charlotte Aull 1999 Reflexive Ethnography: a Guide to Research- ing Selves and Others. London: Routledge. Dubinskas, Frank A. 1982 “Ritual na pozornici: folklorna izvedba kao simbolička akcija.” Narodna umjetnost 19:105–118. Frykman, Jonas 1995 “Informalization of National Identity.” Ethno- logia Europaea 25:5–15. Guillory, John 1993 Cultural Capital: the Problem of Literary Canon Formation. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Marošević, Grozdana 1988 “Folk Music in Croatia in the Period from 1981–1985.” Contributions to the Study of Contemporary Folklore in Croatia, Zorica Rajković (editor), Institute of Folklore Research, Special Issue 9, Zagreb, 75–98. Nahachewsky, Andriy 2001 “Once Again: on the Concept of ‘Second Existence Folk Dance.’” Yearbook for Tradi- tional Music 33:17–28. Rihtman-Auguštin, Dunja 2001 Etnologija i etnomit. Zagreb: Naklada Publica. Sremac, Stjepan 1978 “Smotre folklora nekad i danas.” Narodna umjetnost 15:97–116. Vitez, Zorica 1992 26. Međunarodna smotra folklora, 25.- 28.7.1992., Zagreb, Hrvatska, Zorica Rajković Vitez, Željka Janeš-Benetti, Tvrtko Zebec (editors), Koncertna direkcija Zagreb, 5. 1996 30. Međunarodna smotra folklora, 17.- 21.7.1996., Zagreb, Hrvatska, Erika Krpan (editor), Koncertna direkcija Zagreb, 6–7. 2001 “O smotrama folklora,” Etnološka tribina 24, 31:176–178. Zebec, Tvrtko 1998 “Dance Events as Political Rituals for Expres- sion of Identities in Croatia in the 1990s.” Svanibor Pettan (editor), Music, Politics and War: Views from Croatia. Zagreb, Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Research, 151–162. 2000 Ocjena programa odraslih skupina (opći dojam i ples), Smotra folklora 2000. Zajednice Kulturno-umjetničkih udruga grada Velike Gorice, 12. 6. 2000., Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku, mnsc. 1789.