Old Bridge as a Symbol of Multiculturalism:
Global Discourse and Local Narratives in Mostar
ii
This thesis is dedicated to my husband, Yekta Kamil Noyan, without whom it would never have been accomplished.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation committee, Dr. Hui-Ching Chang, Dr. Zizi Papacharissi, Dr. Andrew Rojecki, Dr. Malgorzata Fidelis, and Dr. Sanjeev Vidyarthi for their guidance and insights throughout the dissertation process. In particular, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Hui-Ching Chang, for her guidance and support during each step of the dissertation process and for always believing in this project. Without her patience and advice, this project would not have been possible. I have been fortunate to receive financial assistance and grants from the University of Illinois at Chicago for my doctoral studies and research. The University of Illinois Foundation Graduate Fellowship for Study of Eastern Europe allowed me to finish my fieldwork and interviews in Mostar. Additionally, I want to thank the staff of Nansen Dialogue Center in Mostar for their support during the research and interviewing. Most importantly, I want to thank all the interviewees in Mostar who generously shared their time and their stories with me. All the great souls who once walked on the Old Bridge and their individual stories inspired me.
I would also like to thank my friends and family for their strong support throughout the entire Ph.D. program and stressful dissertation writing process. Particularly, my daughter, Arya, who has always been a cheerful distraction, yet acted as a source of motivation with her unconditional love and joy of living. Most importantly, I would like to thank my husband, Yekta Kamil, who never let me quit this project and continuously supported me to see the light at the end of the tunnel. His love, encouragement and advice were invaluable. Lastly, I want to thank my parents who have taught me that the ability to learn is both a gift and a responsibility.
GN
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1
II. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................... 7
A. Public Space ...................................................................................................................................... 7
1. Political and Economic Dimensions of Public Space ................................................ 9
2. Social and Cultural Dimensions of Public Space ........................................................ 9
3. Place Attachment and Public Space ............................................................................. 11
4. Conflicting Character of Public Space .......................................................................... 11
B. Globalization .................................................................................................................................. 13
1. Time and Space ...................................................................................................................... 15
2. Role of the Nation States .................................................................................................. 18
3. Nation Branding and the Global City ........................................................................... 21
4. Culture: Homogenization or Multiculturalism .......................................................... 23
C. Theoretical Grounding: Dialogical Narration Theory ................................................... 27
1. Existence of Multiple Voices ............................................................................................. 27
2. Contextualization of Narratives ....................................................................................... 28
3. Interaction between Self and the Other ..................................................................... 29
4. Identity and Dialogic Narration of Public Space ..................................................... 31
D. Bosnia-Herzegovina: History and Current Situation .................................................... 34
1. Pre-Ottoman ............................................................................................................................ 35
2. Ottoman..................................................................................................................................... 36
3. Austria-Hungarian ................................................................................................................. 38
4. Yugoslavia ................................................................................................................................. 39
5. Dissolution of Yugoslavia ................................................................................................... 41
E. Research Site: Old Bridge and Mostar ............................................................................... 46
1. Mostar: Before the 1992-1995 War............................................................................... 47
2. Mostar: During and After the 1992-1995 War ......................................................... 50
3. Rebuilding the Old Bridge ................................................................................................ 52
F. Research Questions and Rationale ...................................................................................... 53
III. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 56
A. Qualitative Research .................................................................................................................... 56
B. Document Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 57
v
C. Observation ..................................................................................................................................... 58
D. Interviewing ..................................................................................................................................... 64
1. Recruiting Interviewees ....................................................................................................... 66
2. Language Issues ..................................................................................................................... 69
3. Consent and Confidentiality ............................................................................................. 70
4. Interview Process ................................................................................................................... 72
E. Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 75
F. Limitations/Issues in the Field ................................................................................................. 76
IV. THEMATIC FINDINGS- PUBLIC SPACE........................................................... 78
A. Living in/with the Old Bridge: Portraits of Typical Days ............................................. 78
1. Old Bridge in the Summer ................................................................................................ 78
2. Old Bridge in the Winter.................................................................................................... 80
B. Experience of Public Space ....................................................................................................... 82
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
CHAPTER PAGE
C. Spatial Boundaries ........................................................................................................................ 89
D. Place Attachment .......................................................................................................................... 95
E. Symbol and Identities ............................................................................................................... 103
F. Legends ........................................................................................................................................... 106
G. Divided City ................................................................................................................................... 109
1. An Economic Gap between the East and the West ............................................. 109
2. A (Hoped for) Unified City Despite Geographical Division .............................. 112
3. Those Who are Culpable.................................................................................................. 116
V. THEMATIC FINDINGS- GLOBALIZATION .................................................... 121
A. Role of International Organizations .................................................................................. 121
B. City Branding and Tourism .................................................................................................... 136
C. Multiculturalism .......................................................................................................................... 143
VI. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 153
A. Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 153
B. Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 158
C. Future Research .......................................................................................................................... 160
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 162
vi
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 174
Appendix A ..........................................................................................................175
Appendix B ..........................................................................................................176
Appendix C ..........................................................................................................177
Appendix D ..........................................................................................................179
Appendix E ..........................................................................................................180
Appendix F...........................................................................................................185
Appendix G ..........................................................................................................186
Appendix H ..........................................................................................................189
Appendix I ...........................................................................................................191
Appendix J ...........................................................................................................192
Appendix K ..........................................................................................................193
VITA .................................................................................................................... 197
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BiH Bosnia and Herzegovina
BH Tourism Tourism Association of Bosnia and Herzegovina
BRIC Brazil, Russia, India and China
EU European Union
IRB Institutional Review Board
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NDC Mostar Nansen Dialogue Center in Mostar
vii
OHR Office of the High Representative
OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
RCVC Refugee Children and Vulnerable Citizens
UN United Nations
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
viii
SUMMARY
This ethnographic study explores contested meanings attached to Old Bridge in Mostar, a unique, divided public space and also a UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) Heritage Site where locals must negotiate their identities vis-à-vis global and national authorities. Narratives of the locals are embedded within, and at the same time, struggle against state and international discourse about what Old Bridge is and ought to be. Two major themes emerged during my fieldwork, which I have labeled public space and globalization.
Residents’ narrations of memories, legends, images and daily use of Old Bridge show us the social construction of public space and how it was contested for political, economic and ethnic reasons. As locals narrate Old Bridge, they also define—against other residents' alternative ethnic, political, and cultural inclinations on the one hand, and constructions by governmental and international organizations on the other—their identities and worldviews. Diverse, if not opposing, views on Old Bridge highlight the dialogical character of these narratives. Eventually, local conflicts over public space point to larger ethnic and cultural issues in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Interviews show that locals spoke of the divided Mostar in three different ways. First, residents refer to economic development gaps between the East and West of Mostar, while talking about the divided status of the city. Second, residents refer to Old Bridge and the Neretva River as a geographical border separating the eastern and western sectors. Third, residents feel that the division is developed mentally, strengthened by the rhetoric and media images of those of the older generations and politicians. Old Bridge, once a space of opposition and even military
ix
conflict, still stands as a spatial boundary that reflects the current conflicts within the city whether they are cultural, economic, and/or political in character.
Globalization was another theme I explored in order to understand how globalization affects interpretations of meanings about the Old Bridge at multiple levels and aspects, specifically, how locals' narratives of public space differ from those of state and global authorities, as evidenced in various documents and texts. There is an enormous resentment towards international authorities and organizations, by both younger and older generations of Mostar residents. They claim that international organizations could not play an influential and preventative role during the Bosnian War. Furthermore, international organizations have been criticized for their current policies, which many regard as inactive or ineffective. There is also an impression among many Mostar residents that the international organizations replace the empires which previously ruled in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
There appeared to be mixed interpretations with regard to the impact of UNESCO’s decision to add Old Bridge to the World Heritage List. Generally, the residents I interviewed describe this as a positive step toward reconciliation in Mostar. A handful of residents from both sides find the decision beneficial for tourism and for promoting Mostar. Although praising UNESCO’s decision, most interviewees criticized UNESCO for its inability to provide further inspection and protection for Old Bridge and its surroundings. That the Old Bridge is a World Heritage Site has also become an overarching theme for Mostar's city branding and tourism promotion, often through selective reading of history, as the city tries to find a delicate balance between economic gain and preserving its cultural character and identity, a struggle that most residents find unsettling.
x
Representation of Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism is also found to be more prominent at the global level than the local level. Though state officials and global authorities unanimously agree—and indeed greatly promote through various discourses, whether online, printed, or in other manifestations—Old Bridge as a multiculturalism symbol, locals narrate different meanings and provide alternatives to the dominant ordering and imagining of the Old Bridge. For the locals, Mostar has always been naturally multicultural and there is no need for a multicultural concept to be brought by international organizations. As Mostar's multicultural character has been brought into a halt during the war, some locals have yet to see international organizations' effective efforts in making Mostar multicultural again.
As a public space, Old Bridge and Mostar are conceived, perceived, and represented by different agencies, whether individual, or state or international organizations, as each embraces a unique view of the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially the destruction and the rebuilding of the Old Bridge. As locals continue to live their day-to-day life in response to, and in spite of, global discourse imposed by UNESCO and others, Old Bridge continues to evolve as site of interpretations.
1
I. INTRODUCTION1
When Allah the Merciful and Compassionate first created this world, the earth was smooth and even as a finely engraved plate. That displeased the devil who envied man this gift of God. And while the earth was still just as it had come from God's hands, damp and soft as unbaked clay, he stole up and scratched the face of God's earth with his nails as much and as deeply as he could. Therefore . . . deep rivers and ravines were formed which divided one district from another and kept men apart . . . And Allah felt pity when he saw what the Accursed One had done . . . so he sent his angels to . . . spread their wings above those places and . . . men learnt from the angels of God how to build bridges, and therefore, after fountains, the greatest blessing is to build a bridge and the greatest sin to interfere with it.
Ivo Andric, 2009
The Bridge Over the Drina
Ivo Andric, 1962 Nobel Laureate from Bosnia-Herzegovina, in his novel The Bridge Over the Drina, narrated the story of God's creation of the world with a focus on bridges. Although Andric's story focuses on a public space created by God, in real life public spaces are designed, built and used by human beings. Parks, plazas, streets and other spaces constitute the foundation of our daily social lives, as public space provides "an open and inclusive stage for social interaction, political action and cultural exchange" (Carmona, 2008, p. 4). How users experience places is an intriguing question—as studied by various scholars, such as Carmona, 2008; Low, 2000; King, 1980—addressing concerns for protecting built places, especially public spaces, which have increasingly turned into primary targets in political, economic and/or military conflicts.
1 Some small parts of Chapter I and II are already appeared in ``Noyan, G. (2013). Dialogical Narrations in the Divided City of Mostar. In Tosoni, S., Tarantino, M., & Giaccardi, C. (Eds.) Media and the City: Urbanism, Technology and Communication. (pp. 214-232), Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing``
2
A pedestrian bridge is a public space, often built over a physical obstacle such as river, for the purpose of connecting one side to the other. As public space, bridges are used and experienced in multiple forms by different individuals. One can use the bridge to cross from one side to the other as a part of daily routine while commuting between home and work. The bridge can also be used as a meeting point for friends; a venue for public protests; a spot to take the best touristic photo; a shelter for the homeless or a place for beggars; and so on. The bridge possesses not only a physical existence (in material and architectural terms), but also an imaginative existence (as an idea or symbol). One can view the bridge as a marvel of architecture, an inspiration for a poem, a place to remember childhood memories, or just an ordinary space seen every day.
Public space is naturally and inherently a social concept existing in imagined, discursive and empirical domains and including diverse individual identities that are continuously asserted, negotiated and contested. Andric's book is a historical novel covering 400 years of the region, from the construction of the Drina Bridge during the Ottoman era to the partial destruction of the bridge during the First World War. Like Andric's famous novel, this study will focus on a specific public space—albeit in a different city—that is, the Old Bridge in Mostar. Old Bridge is a 16th century pedestrian bridge that stands across the river Neretva, connecting the two sides of the city of Mostar in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Old Bridge was constructed in 1566 after Mostar became a regional administrative center under Ottoman rule. The name Mostar itself refers to the Old Bridge. Mostar means bridgekeepers in the Bosnian language; the "bridgekeepers" guarded the Old Bridge. For centuries, Bosnians, Croats and Serbs intermixed relatively peacefully in Mostar, until the Bosnian War of 1992-1995. Yet in just a few hours on November 9, 1993, the bridge was destroyed by the shelling of the Croat paramilitary forces.
3
Before the devastating Bosnian War, the population of Mostar was one-third Bosniak, one-third Croatian and one-fifth Serbian (Grodach, 2002). After the Bosnian War, since each ethnic group migrated to the entity dominated and governed by its own ethnic group, Bosnia and Herzegovina were partitioned into quasi-ethnic regions, and the ethnic structures of the city changed. Serbians were displaced or migrated to the Republica Srpska (dominated by Serbs), while Bosniaks and Croats stayed in Mostar which belonged to the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (shared by Croats and Bosnians). As the ethnic partition of the city has changed, monuments and heritage sites have been viewed principally as religious and cultural symbols, and thus targeted by military groups.
Following the signing of Dayton Agreement on December 14, 1995, which ended the war, restoration of Old Bridge was initiated and overseen by a scientific committee established by UNESCO. Meanwhile, a temporary bridge was built on November 9, 1993 (Pašić, 2006). Old Bridge was designated a National Monument of Bosnia and Herzegovina on July 12, 2004, and the rebuilt Old Bridge opened immediately with a ceremony on July 23, 2004. In July 2005, Old Bridge and its surrounding area were listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site (see Appendix A for a photograph of UNESCO World Heritage Inscription).
The Old Bridge has always been considered a symbol of Mostar's identity both by Bosnians and foreigners (Donia & Fine, 1994; Pašić, 2006). The destruction of the Old Bridge was portrayed by journalists, politicians and academics as the destruction of Bosnian society. Fisk (1994), for instance, compares the destruction of the bridge to the destroying of the Bosnian soul, while others (e.g., Donia & Fine, 1994) view it as a betrayal of peaceful existence in a multiethnic society.
4
In the post-war period, reconstruction of Old Bridge was described as an important first attempt at reconciliation and reintroduction of multiculturalism in Bosnian society by international organizations such as UNESCO. Obviously, various international organizations have aimed to restore peace through rebuilding public spaces that were demolished during the war. At the opening ceremony of the rebuilt Old Bridge, Paddy Ashdown, then High Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said that Old Bridge symbolizes "knitting together communities so recently torn apart" (Makas, 2007, p. 1).
In the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, international organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU) played influential roles both during the Bosnian War and as the main peace negotiators who ended the war. In the post-conflict reconstruction process, international organizations such as the Office of High Representative (OHR) gained a higher status compared to national authorities to support and oversee the country`s transformation into a peaceful and stable democracy. Globalization has been a process that not only affects nation-states but also everything inside the nation-states. Specifically, the influence of nation-states in political and economic fields is diminished arbitrarily or sometimes voluntarily in conjunction with memberships in regional/international organizations such as EU.
In post-conflict societies like Bosnia and Herzegovina, public spaces like the Old Bridge facilitate a (re)defining of the local identity and help to maintain ethnic relations not only by preserving peace and stability in the country but also attracting tourists and symbolizing the global identity of the city. Considering the power of distant forces in shaping and restructuring our daily lives, globalization has influenced the ways a given culture may represent itself and has led to the need for differentiation in relation to other cultures. Presenting a specific image of a
5
place to attract foreign capital, investment, and/or tourism has become a requirement for survival in a global world (Kotler & Gertner, 2002).
Accordingly, the rebuilt Old Bridge as a UNESCO designated World Heritage Site is likely to be used to change lingering negative perceptions of Mostar from the Bosnian War and to revive Mostar as a center of global tourism. Multiculturalism is promoted by national and global authorities as a source of stability and dialogue between those of differing ethnic identities. Emphasis on multiculturalism promotes and reinforces expectations for Bosnian citizens to live together in harmony and peace. Such discourse is likely to influence citizens' practices toward other ethnic groups at the national level and the ways in which they view themselves in relation to supranational authorities at the global level.
Communication scholars seem particularly well-situated to understand the communicative role of the public space and the extent to which locals' perception of public space resemble, diverge, or present a mixed assembly with, perceptions held by global authorities. As Lawrence and Low (1990) asserted:
As expressions of culture, the built forms may be seen to play a communicative role embodying and conveying meaning between groups, or individuals within groups, at a variety of levels. The built environment may also act to reaffirm the system of meaning and the values a group finds embodied in the cosmos. (p. 466)
My primary research focus is to analyze representations of Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism by national and supranational authorities, and to examine the extent to which these representations resonate with the interpretations of locals who reside in Mostar. Analysis of
6
public space is important for presenting the discourse of power relations and allowing us to understand ongoing struggles in a specific place.
This study is grounded in Bakhtin's dialogical narration theory, and assumes that narratives of Old Bridge are not static but allow multiple interpretations over time depending on context. My intention is to read Old Bridge as a cultural text that facilitates understanding the attached meanings by global authorities and local residents of different ethnicities. This study will make an important contribution to understanding political, cultural and economic transition occurring as a result of globalization processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a post-conflict society, vis-à-vis supranational organizations such as the OHR and the EU.
To identify the themes and narratives used in representations of Old Bridge, written documents such as policy reports, guidebooks, museum materials, and tourism and promotional materials that denote official representations of Old Bridge, were analyzed. I also examined how the dominant representations of Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism might be challenged by the local residents. By interviewing local residents, I collected narrative data that reflected the residents' life experiences and perceptions of Old Bridge. Through written and spoken discourses by local residents, local authorities, and supraorganizations, I hope to present a multi-layered, textured analysis of the representations of Old Bridge.
7
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews the current literature on public space and previously examined local effects of globalization on individuals, nation-states, and cultures. A theoretical justification for dialogic narration theory will argue that by integrating literature from these lines of research, Old Bridge can be understood not only as a public space influenced by globalization but also as an imaginative/symbolic space represented dialogically by individuals and national and global authorities. Finally, a brief historical account of Bosnia and Herzegovina will be provided to better situate Mostar and Old Bridge.
A. Public Space
Public space provides "an open and inclusive stage for social interaction, political action and cultural exchange" (Carmona, 2008, p. 4). Parks, plazas, streets, pedestrian bridges, and monuments, as public space, constitute a foundation of our daily lives. Types of public space have evolved throughout history, ranging from ancient Roman Forums to today's shopping malls. According to Carmona (2008), public space includes
…all those parts of the built and natural environment, public and private, internal and external, urban and rural, where the public have free, although not necessarily unrestricted, access. It encompasses: all the streets, squares and other rights of way, whether predominantly in residential, commercial or community/civic uses; the open spaces and parks; the open countryside; the "public/private" spaces both internal and external where public access is welcomed—if controlled—such as private shopping centres or rail and bus stations; and the interiors of key public and civic buildings such as libraries, churches, or town halls. (pp. 4-5)
8
This broad definition of public space combines both built and natural spaces without differentiating public and private use. A narrower definition of public space excludes private and internal space as well as the open countryside (Carmona, 2008). By limiting public space to the built environment, Low (2000) presents a narrower definition of public space as "the designed environment…expressions of human endeavors, [where] artifacts of the social world are accommodated, communicated, and interpreted" (p. 47).
Issues concerning "public space" have been studied by scholars representing a variety of fields, including political science, philosophy, geography, urban planning, anthropology, visual arts and cultural studies. Scholars across different fields have covered topics including but not limited to the design, management, development and transformation of public spaces, with many focused on how public spaces are used and managed by people on an equal basis in an inclusive process. Scholars (Harvey, 2006; Low, 1996) have also studied the exclusionary aspects of public space, focusing on the spatial segregation of activities in terms of class, ethnicity and race. In anthropological scholarship, studies of public space have focused on the objectification and construction of other-ness (Gupta & Ferguson, 1992; Harvey, 2006). Excluding specific groups from a particular space and/or prohibiting specific activities within that space strengthen the experience of otherness in public space.
Additionally, public space is theorized in postmodernist and feminist theory with respect to issues of surveillance and deterritorialization (Baudrillard 1988; Foucault 1982; Jameson 1984; Kaplan 1987). Deterritorialization is increasingly becoming a norm as people on the move experience a weakened connection between culture and place.
Furthermore, scholars have examined how public space might be beneficial for human health by encouraging sports and reducing stress levels (Carmona 2008). In terms of
9
environment, such studies emphasize the fact that public space improves air quality and encourages sustainability. Scholars have also examined the extent to which public space might encourage social cohesion by enabling a venue for social interaction and communication.
1. Political and Economic Dimensions of Public Space
Any spatial form, including public space, is a product of conflicting political and economic forces (Bourdieu, 1977; Foucault, 1975; Harvey, 1985; Low, 2000). Low (2000) argues that the design of a public space can reflect the political agency of the state. Similarly, Foucault (1975) asserts that public space enables the dominance of one group over another through surveillance. Bourdieu (1977) criticizes the fact that the design of public space often reproduces the power relations of the past.
Since public space reflects the political and economic power structures within a society (Low, 2000), the discourse of a public space illuminates the larger political and economic process. Scholars (e.g., Carmona, 2008) have underlined the economic benefits of public space, arguing that public space might have a positive impact on property prices, investment levels and economic performance. In line with the impact of globalization, the importance attached to public spaces has increased as both individuals and countries have attempted to present the distinctiveness and uniqueness of specific public spaces as if they were products of the marketplace (Low, 1996). Public spaces are increasingly used for nation branding to attract foreign direct investment and global tourism.
2. Social and Cultural Dimensions of Public Space
Scholars (Carr, Francis, Rivlin, & Stone, 1992; Duncan, 1990; Low, 2000; Rapoport, 1982) have focused on the relation between public space and social and cultural identities by
10
highlighting the communicative character of public space. In this sense, public space is seen as a venue for social encounters and interaction.
Throughout history, public spaces have supported the needs of communities for celebrations and rituals; thus, public spaces "symbolize the community and the larger society or culture in which [they] exist" (Carr et al., 1992, p. 23). Accordingly, interpretations of public space should take into consideration the following factors: (1) the past and present existence of a space; (2) the social behavior accommodated by the place; and (3) the symbolic and communicative aspects of the place (Low, 2000, p. 47). Similarly, Duncan (1990) notes the possibility of reading public space as communication about social relations by analyzing contemporary understanding and historical accounts of a specific public space.
Lefebvre (1997) asserted that public space is socially produced and constructed. Low (1996) defines social construction of space as "the actual transformation of space—through people's social exchanges, memories, images, and daily use of the material setting—into scenes and actions that convey symbolic meaning" (p. 862).
The communicative character of built environments allows public space to act as a mnemonic, "reminding people of the behavior expected of them, the linkages and separations in space and time—who does what, where, when, and with whom" (Rapaport, 1982, pp. 80-81). Rapaport (1982) finds the mnemonic function of a public space "equivalent to group memory and consensus" (p. 81). Similarly, Low (2000) emphasizes the mnemonic processes that are encoded in space. Both scholars acknowledge that public space embodies a living history where individuals witness local cultural meanings.
11
3. Place Attachments and Public Space
Scholars, while studying public space, have also emphasized the concept of place attachment, which is defined as "the bonding of people to places" (Altman & Low, 1992, p. 2). Place attachment is viewed as essential, contributing to individual, group, and cultural self-definition and integrity (Altman & Low, 1992; Low, 1996). As Carr et al. (1992) assert, "links are established between that place and the life of an individual, links to a valued group, to a whole culture and its history, economics, and politics" (p. 187).
Place attachment can develop at the individual level or at the group level, stemming from the history of a group within a specific place and their experience and social relations in that place (Carr et al., 1992). At the group level, place attachment enables the linking of people to more abstract notions such as nation, religion or culture through symbols associated with a specific place (Altman & Low, 1992).
4. Conflicting Character of Public Space
Social theorists have emphasized the importance of everyday activities and social relations in negotiating culture (de Certau, 1984; Foucault, 1984). Considering the fact that it witnesses the daily activities of different groups within the community, public space enables us to understand the divisions and/or connections between different cultural groups. Furthermore, public space stands as an arena in which ethnic and cultural identities are constructed, challenged and continually negotiated.
Rapoport (1982) emphasizes that designers should take into consideration the symbols in a given culture when designing public space. Yet, in multicultural societies designing public space becomes problematic since "symbols are neither fixed nor shared" (p. 45). According to
12
Rapaport (1982), designing public space is "a process of encoding information" which is decoded by the users of public space (p. 57). Therefore, there is always a risk that users of a public space might not communicate if the code is not shared by all users (Rapaport, 1982).
Tunbridge and Ashworth (1996) assert that representations of public space do not usually provide "an ordered and widely intelligible communication," but rather act as "a city of Babel where numerous languages are being muttered or shouted together, most of which are only understood by some of the citizens [and] many are so obsolete as to be only dimly and incompletely comprehended" (p. 15). Tunbridge and Ashworth (1996) emphasize the dialogic character of public spaces and buildings in cities, arguing that their meanings produce "a language for which each individual possesses their own personal dictionary which is constantly and rapidly being replaced over time" (p. 15). For instance, a monument of a political figure in a public space might evoke different interpretations of this particular place depending on one`s political views. Furthermore, the changing of names of public spaces in line with current dominant political authorities reflects the contested status of public spaces.
In ideal terms, public space refers to an area that is open and accessible to all citizens regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, race, religion, culture or socio-economic status. However, "the public" is not a homogenous concept; the public is rather composed of different groups and subgroups of people who may belong to different cultural, ethnic, religious and/or linguistic groups. Thus, in reality, public space might turn into a place where different fragments of society contest to exclude others. As an illustration, the Taliban intentionally destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan in 2001 on religious grounds. Recent arguments following the Charlottesville over incident whether Confederate era monuments and statues honoring pro-slavery figures should be removed from public spaces in America verify how volatile public
13
space can be. Because different cultural, ethnic and/or religious groups can lay claim to the same public spaces, public space can easily be transformed into both physical and symbolic battlegrounds.
Furthermore, public space continuously evolves in response to global forces by both citizens and nation-states, with the commodification of public space, and the influence of power from distant political and economic forces. It is, therefore, imperative to examine the concept of globalization.
B. Globalization
Globalization—the buzz word/cliché of the 1990s—challenged scholars to find a common definition and analyze its controversial effects in our daily lives. Despite a vast literature on the subject, globalization still lacks a clear definition. Yet there is widespread recognition that "the world is rapidly being molded into a shared social space by economic and technological forces and that developments in one region of the world can have profound consequences for the life chances of individuals or communities on the other side of the globe" (Held, McGrew, Goldblatt, &Perraton, 1999, p. 1). Keohane and Nye (2000), highlighting the role of interdependence, define globalization as "a state of the world involving networks of interdependence of multicontinental distances" (p. 105).Furthermore, it is acknowledged that worldwide interconnectedness is "widening, deepening and speeding up" (Held et al., 1999, p. 2).
There is a difference between scholars focusing specifically on the economic forces of globalization (Hurrell, 2017; Ohmae, 1995; Wallerstein, 2008; Wolf, 2004) and scholars who underline multiple driving forces of globalization including the economic, technological, cultural
14
and political (Giddens, 1990, 2002; Robertson, 1992; Rosenau, 1990; Scholte, 1993). The first group presents a narrow view of globalization, while the latter paints a multifaceted picture. The second group emphasizes that globalization can take many forms, ranging from environmental globalization to military globalization (Keohane & Nye, 2000).
Whether focusing only on economics or on multiple driving forces, most studies (Barber, 1995; Klein, 1999; Rapley, 2004) tell the darker side of the story, emphasizing inequality, poverty and the tyranny of brands as end products of economic globalization. Such studies argue that globalization via free markets can create a vicious circle by weakening institutions of social cohesion or increasing income inequality, which also increases the probability of domestic political violence. Harvey (1995) asserts that globalization creates uneven spatio-temporal development as nation-states no longer control the mobility of capital. Huntington (1996) further explores the disruptive character of globalization, arguing that the world is now divided into conflicting civilizations that will eventually decrease Western dominance in world affairs. Huntington (1996) argues that in the new global world, conflicts will be cultural rather than ideological or economic.
Barber (1995) envisions the spread of an America-dominated worldwide culture and argued that "McWorld" overwhelms local cultures, leading to the further spread of extremist forces bent on retaliation. Recent studies (Mahbubani, 2013) emphasize global convergence and argue that rising powers in Asia would be more effective in transforming world politics. Indeed, both politically and economically we observe a power shift in world affairs as G20 countries and BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) gain prominent roles in terms of influence.
Contemporary events, including but not limited to the emergence of ISIS; Britain's rejecting of the EU membership popularly known as Brexit; and Trump's presidency, with its
15
anti-globalist rhetoric, has led us to question whether globalization has ended (Inglehart &Norris, 2016). We are witnessing a power shift in the political arena as the main actors change. Non-state actors such as international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and the jihadi terrorists are increasingly getting prominent roles in forming and/or destroying international order (Barkawi, 2017; Baylis, 2017; Joachim, 2017). Despite the fact that there is a pushback against globalization, I argue that there is no alternative to globalization in tackling current problems. Likewise, in How to Judge Globalism, Sen (2008) argues that "globalization is a historical process that has offered an abundance of opportunities and rewards in the past and continues to do so today" (p. 24). While acknowledging the presence of economic inequality, Sen (2008) asserts that globalization can also work to lessen global inequality. Bildt (2017) also urges restoration of faith in globalization, arguing that erecting trade barriers or walls would further harm underdeveloped regions and in turn would undo all the benefits gained through international cooperation so far.
Although globalization is a process occurring at various levels and to different degrees, this study will focus primarily on the effects of globalization at the local level to understand how public space is experienced by locals in their daily lives. My literature review on globalization will begin with the shifting relationship between time and space and its impact on nation-states, individuals and cultures.
1. Time and Space
While most studies (Wallerstein, 2008; Wolf, 2004) focus on the economics aspects of globalization, other scholars (Appadurai, 1990; Giddens, 1990; Thompson, 1995; Tomlinson, 1999) have also addressed the cultural implications of globalization.Several terms have been used to define the effects of globalization on the detachment or complication of the place-culture
16
relationship, including "deterritorialization" (Appadurai, 1996; Tomlinson, 1999); "delocalization" (Thompson, 1995); and "dis-placement" (Giddens, 1990). Tomlinson (1999) defines deterritorialization as "the weakening or dissolution of the connection between everyday lived culture and territorial location" (p. 128).Deterritorialization also transforms the relationship between place and culture and affects individual identity and experiences.
Our local places are increasingly restructured by the global flows of information, images and capital. Globalization is criticized for replacing "real" localities with non-places, such as airport departure lounges and supermarkets that "cannot be defined as relational or historical or concerned with identity" (Augé, 1995, p. 78). In contrast to non-places, Augé (1995) mentions anthropological places or "real" places that "create the organically social" by enabling cultural identity and memory in daily routines and social interactions (p. 94). Deterritorialization does not mean the end of locality, but rather denotes "its transformation into a more complex cultural space"(Tomlinson, 1999, p. 149). In order to understand the complex character of today’s public space, one is required to focus on the local level—how people negotiate their cultural space through non-places and real localities.
Globalization not only transforms the places where we live but at the same time influences our cultural experiences and how we identify ourselves in relation to those places.In pre-modern societies, local activities were mostly attached to specific places at specific times. With the advent of modernity, members of societies developed relations with others far away from their local place. The structures and organizations that dominate our lives are usually administered and overseen by individuals distant from us. Rather than face-to-face interactions, individuals are increasingly communicating with others through telecommunication and online
17
communication methods. Global communication infrastructure enabled the Arab Spring in 2011 and the Gezi protests in May 2013, in that like-minded members of the younger generations organized and protested as we all watched and followed via social media tools such as Twitter and Snapchat. We are increasingly witnessing "the dislocation of space from place"(Giddens, 1990, p. 19). In modern societies, space and place no longer have to coincide.
According to Giddens (1990), separation of time and space is not a linear development. On the contrary, it is a process with dialectical features that allow the coordination of relations in a vast geography. Giddens (1990) illustrates this process using the example of the train timetable as a "time-space ordering device" (p. 20).
Places that we live in are impacted by forces far away rather than the geographically local. We live in a world where "disembedded institutions, linking local practices with globalized social relations, organize major aspects of day-to-day life" (Giddens, 1990, p. 79). For instance, the lives of citizens living in an EU country are organized according to the rules decided by EU authorities. These rules cover multiple policy areas, ranging from education to parking fees.
Giddens (1990) criticizes the role of abstract and distanciated forces in structuring our lives and our tendency to take those changes for granted. He argues that the "advent of modernity increasingly tears space away from place by fostering relations between ‘absent’ others, locationally distant from any given situation of face-to-face interaction" (p. 18). In sum, the places that individuals inhabit are much less affected by geography and local forces; places are increasingly under the impact of distant forces far away from locals.
18
Considering the relationship between local and global, no individual is exempt from the impact of globalization, even though the level of impact varies according to the location of the individual.
2. Role of the Nation-States
Like individuals, no nation-state is exempt from the effects of globalization. Accordingly, the role of nation-states is debated in discussions of globalization. The question of whether the role of the nation-state is declining with the comparative increase in the power of international and supranational organizations is openly debated.
The transformationalist school of thought focuses on the unprecedented and profound changes that both nation-states and citizens are experiencing due to globalization. Viewing globalization as the main force driving political, economic, and social changes, transformationalists (Castells, 2000; Giddens, 1990; Rosenau, 1990) define globalization as a dynamic and open-ended process in which both nation-states and citizens are being constantly reconfigured.
Although it is argued that nation-states are losing their power due to globalization, we are living in a world where the nation-state acts as the common political unit rather than serving as an exception. As Lechner and Boli (2008) assert, the nation-state is indeed "a sign of globalization" (p. 219), as it is acknowledged to be the common, legitimate administrative and sovereign unit around the world. Yet Lechner and Boli (2008) acknowledge that states are suffering a crisis as their ability to cope with global problems such as recent financial crises or threats from fundamentalist groups is questioned.
In contrast, hyperglobalists announce the demise of nation-states as numerous emerging powers challenge their authority. Ohmae (1995) declares the end of the nation-state, arguing that
19
its role is reduced with economic globalization. Ohmae (1995) defines the nation-state as "a nostalgic fiction" (p. 224) with the rise of regional economic organizations such as the EU and ASEAN. Ohmae (2008) argues that states are becoming irrelevant and inefficient as they no longer control the four "I's": Investment, Industry, Information and the Individual. Similarly, Castells (2004) asserts that the instrumental capacity of the nation-state is decreasing due to the global flows of economic activities, information, crime and terrorism.
To a certain extent, the influence of nation-states in political and economic fields has diminished arbitrarily, and sometimes voluntarily, as states increasingly share sovereignty with regional/international organizations. In today's world, we experience a highly decentralized global administrative structure that is quite different from that of the previous era. Alongside nation-states we see the emergence of intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations and its umbrella organizations, to manage issues between and above states. Strange (2008) views the subordination of state authority to international and regional institutions and bodies as a sign of declining state authority in a global world. However, this does not make the nation-state obsolete in a global world. Rather, as transformationalists insist, the role of the nation-state is being redefined along with the political, social and economic consequences of globalization. As states have lost the control of space and time in the face of global flows of capital, goods, services and technology, a new form of society, the network state, has emerged (Castells, 2004). Castells (2004) asserts that nation-states will continue to exist but only as "nodes of a broader network of power" (p. 357). A network state is composed of nation-states and other forms of government including international institutions; associations of nation-states; regional and local organizations; and social movements and non-governmental organizations. Thus, a network state makes nation-states dependent on a broader network of powers including
20
supranational organizations (Castells, 2004). Castells (2004) attaches enormous power to global networks, including the ability "to subdue any identity in the fulfillment of transnational instrumental goals" (p. 358).
Although the global financial crisis of 2008 put economic globalization at risk, the recent terror attacks of November 13, 2015 in Paris, March 22, 2016 in Brussels, and June 28, 2016 in Istanbul showed that insecurities, divisions and conflicts that came along with globalization are more real than ever. These incidents highlighted the question of whether nation-states are any longer capable of protecting the safety and welfare of their citizens.
Contrary to the claims of the skeptics, many scholars (Wallerstein, 2008; Wolf, 2004) argue that nation-states are not dying in the globalization process. As Brexit showed, nation-states are prepared to make a comeback (Scuira, 2017). Furthermore, the security situation requires a more active role for the nation-states in the global arena. To illustrate, asymmetrical threats such as fundamentalist terror groups indicate the primacy of sovereign states in responding those threats (Rojecki, 2002, p. 77). Furthermore, the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria emerged as the worst representatives of non-state actors in globalization, using social media to recruit supporters and to show its brutal acts (Leech, 2014). Thus, the need to find novel approaches in dealing with asymmetrical threats require further cooperation between nation-states and international organizations as well.
Explaining globalization mostly in economic terms, Wallerstein (2008) ascribes continuing importance to the role of nation-state. Wallerstein (2008) views the multiplicity of states as a requirement for the capitalist world economy, asserting that without the interference of states, the capitalist system could not survive. Rejecting the notion of the "Third World," Wallerstein (2008) categorizes states as core/periphery and semi-periphery in accordance with
21
their roles in the production process. Wallerstein presents a realist approach to world economy, arguing that division of labor unifies the global structure, and therefore political and cultural homogeneity is unlikely.
As our daily lives are shaped and restructured by distanciated forces, we observe "ambivalence" since the local places that we inhabit belong to us only in a "provisional sense" because they are owned by global capital (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 107). Thus, it becomes more difficult, if not impossible, to preserve local cultural identity against the pressures outside the borders of nation-state (Tomlinson, 1999). As preserving local cultural identities remains challenging, globalization processes urge nation-states to emphasize their uniqueness vis-à-vis other states to attract foreign investment and to maintain their strength both domestically and internationally. This naturally leads us to a discussion of the emergence of global cities and the role of nation branding.
3. Nation Branding and the Global City
A new spatial form of city has developed along with the globalization process: the global city. Sassen (1991) defines the global city as an important part of global economy, serving both as a production center and marketplace. Sassen (1991) focuses on the changes in geography and composition of the global economy that has led to "a spatially dispersed, yet globally integrated organization of economic activity" (p. 3). This duality has given major cities a new strategic role. In addition to their traditional roles as centers for international trade and banking, major cities now serve as: (1) command points in the organization of the world economy; (2) key locations for finance; (3) sites for production of goods; and (4) markets for products (p. 3).
Sassen (1991) focuses on the impact of global cities on economies, social orders, and national urban systems, and on the relationships among nation-states and global cities. The main
22
point of her argument is that global cities create economic polarization due to parallel increases in low-wage and high-income jobs (p. 9). Both Sassen (1991) and Castells (2000) underline the fact that there is no single global city; rather, we live in a world connected through networks of cities.
Although globalization makes nation-states and newly emerged global cities more connected, it also requires protection of local culture. Thus, nation-states become more similar, yet not homogenized. "The defense or promotion of the local is a global phenomenon" (Robertson & Khondker, 1998, p. 30). Accordingly, Robertson (2008) defines globalization as "the twofold process of the particularization of the universal and the universalization of the particular" (p. 92). The first process involves an acknowledgement of universalization, while the second implies that there is a global need to define and promote the local.
Globalization does not make nationalism obsolete. In contrast to scholars who confine nationalism to the peripheries in a global world, Billig (1995) demonstrates the universality of nationalism, focusing on the rhetorical forms of flagging and the examples of homeland-making tools (such as the nation, the weather, and the local news). According to Billig (1995), nationalism is not temporary or intermittent, but rather an endemic condition reintroduced and strengthened in our daily lives through the "flagging" of nationhood. Britain's rejection of EU membership to take its sovereignty back, as well as recent independence referendums of Kurds in northern Iraq and Catalans in Spain prove that nationalism continues. Parallel to Anderson's (2006) argument that nations are "imagined communities," Billig (1995) depicts the reproduction of nationhood through political discourse and symbols. Leaders of nation-states daily remind citizens of the place of their nations in a globalized world through the utterance of unification words such as "we, our country, etc." and repeating stereotypes that
23
emphasize "the self and the other." Not only political leaders but also mass media and mass culture play an active role in "banal nationalism." As an illustration, the British media used pubs as a symbol of nationhood. Thereby, nationhood is flagged continually in political rhetoric (Billig, 1995, p. 105).
Accordingly, nation branding or place branding through using symbols has emerged to make a nation, city or a place more visible and attractive both for insiders and outsiders. The term "nation brand" was coined by Anholt in 1996. Anholt developed the Nation Brand Hexagon to measure the success of a nation's brand using the six dimensions of people, tourism, exports, government, investment and immigrants, and culture and heritage (Anholt-GfK Roper, 2009).
Presenting a specific image of a place to attract foreign capital, investment and/or tourists has become a requirement for the survival in a global world, as nations increasingly use corporate marketing tactics, such as catch phrases and slogans, in their promotional materials (Kotler & Gertner, 2002). Nation branding presents a specific tool to symbolically differentiate one country from another through controlling image and representation against the homogenizing forces of globalization.
4. Culture: Homogenization or Multiculturalism
Since globalization has increased the number and levels of connection between both countries and individuals, it is argued that the world is becoming homogenized. But arguing that globalization only leads to cultural homogenization would be an oversimplification, ignoring the cultural dimensions of globalization. Appadurai (1996) argues that the meaning of locality has totally changed with globalization, and it no longer implies what it once did. Yet the assumption of a worldwide cultural homogenization ignores continuous cultural clashes. The primordialist
24
argument, which contends nations are ancient and natural, could not answer why primordial ties are mobilized and turned into violence only in some places. Appadurai (1996) uses Rosenau's image of cascades or turbulence to explain the eruption of ethnic violence at global level: "action sequences in a multicentric world" can lead to unpredictable events worldwide (p. 150). Appadurai (1996) attaches importance to local narratives in this process:
Macroevents, or cascades, work their way into highly localized structures of feeling by being drawn into the discourse and narratives of the locality, in casual conversations and low-key editorializing of the sort that often accompanies the collective reading of newspapers in many neighborhoods and on many front stoops of the world. (p. 153)
These local narratives and structures, which are usually unheard, have the potential to turn into violence. In the long term, connections between local and global cascades facilitate seeing "a neighbor as a friend, a shopkeeper as a foreign traitor, and a local trader as a ruthless capitalist exploiter" (p. 153). Appadurai explains the increase of violence as due to the lack of daily face-to-face relations between locals.According to Appadurai (1996), it is an error to view current conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina as evidence that nationalism is "alive and sick" (p. 20). Appadurai names this error the "Bosnia Fallacy" (p. 21). Rather, he explains ethnic violence as a mobilization of group identities for the sake of nation-states and international organizations in line with the transformation witnessed via globalization. Appadurai (1996) views nation-states as an important part of a larger system, yet accepts their inefficiencies in coping with the current problems stemming from global flows, whether in the form of information or human beings (p.
25
19). Thus, the popularity and spread of multiculturalism as a concept is itself an indication of the "incapacity of states to prevent their minority populations from linking themselves to wider constituencies of religious or ethnic affiliation" (p. 22). In a sense, multiculturalism has been regarded as a tool designed by international organizations to protect minority populations.
The nation-state is now largely subject to the externalities or "sorts of transnational destabilization" (Appadurai, 1996, p. 178) that come with globalization, including mass media, migration, diasporas, and international organizations. Similarly, Robertson (1997) asserts that nation-states are "increasingly subject to the internal, as well as external, constraints of multiculturality" (p. 71), since individual identities, along with the collective ones, are of increasing importance in a global world. Thus, the profound issue of our times is "interpreting and explaining the difference of the other" (Robertson, 1997, p. 72). According to Appadurai (1990), the conflict between cultural homogenization and cultural heterogenization is the main problem of today`s world. Similarly, Robertson and Khondker (1998) assert that clashes, conflicts and tensions constitute a pivotal feature of globalization.
Globalization is a process that affects not only nation-states but everything inside nation-states. Therefore, the voices and opinions of individuals should increasingly be taken into consideration when dealing with global issues. Yet, according to Robertson (1997), viewing societies as unitary and homogenized has been a limitation of globalization scholarship. Robertson asserts that "individuals are as much a part of globalization process as any other basic category of social-theoretical discourse" (p. 79).
Robertson (1997) defines the main impact of globalization on the individual as "the institutionalized construction of the individual" (p. 80) as we observe the encouragement of individual identities attached to the promoted concept of multiculturalism by international
26
organizations. Accordingly, how states deal with the existence of multiple groups or diversity has gained importance as any state is likely to turn into a global village thanks to increases in migration and the spread of global communications.
It is no longer possible to talk about purely homogenous national cultures. According to Bhabba (1994), Serbian nationalism proved that creating a nationally homogenous state "...can only be achieved through the death, literal and figurative, of the complex interweavings of history, and the culturally contingent borderlines of modern nationhood" (p. 7). As the world becomes more global, we encounter "a more transnational and translational sense of the hybridity of imagined communities" (Bhabba, 1994, p. 7). Hence, "the nation is no longer the sign of modernity under which cultural differences are homogenized in the 'horizontal' view of the society. The nation reveals, in its ambivalent and vacillating representation, an ethnography of its own claim to being the norm of social contemporaneity" (p. 214).
Bhabba (1994) points out that cultural difference, which has typically been regarded as an external threat coming from outside national borders, now comprises a threat "within" as it is "no longer a problem of 'other' people" (p. 215). Considering the fact that globalization is a process that is mostly felt at the local level, Bhabba (1994) asserts that globalization "begins at home" (p. xxv).
Although globalization is likely to create homogenization, multiculturalism is becoming the driving norm of our societies as diverse groups of people connect and reside with each other thanks to immigration flows and the information revolution. Accordingly, multiculturalism as a force promoting multiple ethnic and cultural identities without imposing any dominant identity in the society—at least ideally—has been increasingly regarded as the best practical solution not only for post-war Bosnia but for any contemporary society.
27
C. Theoretical Grounding: Dialogical Narration Theory
Narrative has been used as a scholarly tool in many disciplines, including history (Wertsch, 2000; White, 1987), language (Bakhtin, 1981, 1984, 1986; Lotman, 1988, 1990), and cultural psychology (Bruner 1990; Nielsen, 1987). Many narrative studies, across the disciplines, have been founded on Mikhail Bakhtin’s (1981) ideas about dialogic narration. Bakhtin (1986) emphasizes the fact that all texts are mediated:
...behind each text stands a language system. Everything in the text that is repeated and reproduced, everything repeatable and reproducible, everything that can be given outside a given text (the given) conforms to this language system. But at the same time each text (as an utterance) is individual, unique, and unrepeatable, and herein lies its entire significance (its plan, the purposes for which it was created). (p. 105)
1. Existence of Multiple Voices
Bakhtin (1981) defines a language system as a cultural tool that allows "repeatable and reproducible" elements by each individual speaker. In that sense, Bakhtin's perspective does not take semiotics as something neutral and lifeless. Rather, he asserts that all utterances are characterized by "multivoicedness" and "dialogicality" (p. 337). Any speech or text is shaped by cultural, historical and social contexts and thus is itself multivocal.
Narratives do not exist in isolation; they occur as a part of discourse, which is characterized by dialogical and rhetorical processes (Wertsch, 2000). Each individual engages in dialogical discourse because we define ourselves and others in response to previous utterances. Bakhtin (1981) emphasizes the dialogical dynamism of cultural semiotic life through the
28
recognition of the existence of multiple voices. Because there is no limit to the number of voices in any dialogue, dialogic processes enable multiple voices to exist and challenge each other. Bakhtin (1984) argues that any two discourses "oriented to the same referential object within the limits of a single context cannot exist side by side without intersecting dialogically, regardless of whether they confirm, mutually supplement, or (conversely) contradict one another" (p. 187). Similarly, Wertsch (2000) asserts that "the meaning and form of one narrative may be understood in terms of being a dialogic response to another, previous one, in terms of anticipating another, subsequent narrative, and so forth" (p. 517).
Bakhtin's understanding of the dialogic is grounded in the idea that the thesis and person cannot be separated (Bialostosky, 1986). When defining dialogic relations, Bakhtin (1986) asserts that any idea "begins to live, that is, to take shape, to develop, to find and renew its verbal expression, to give birth to new ideas, only when it enters into genuine dialogic relationships with other ideas, with the ideas of others" (p. 88).
2. Contextualization of Narrative
Dialogical narratives develop at different levels changing "from elements of an utterance to the single word—to the entire text and beyond the text to its cultural context including the networks of socio-discursive relations, or the intertext" (Nielsen, 1987, p. 138). Furthermore, dialogical narratives can occur in different contexts such as the institutional, ideological or cultural, and can change in line with different social categories, such as classes, nations, ethnicities and so on (Nielsen, 1987).
29
3. Interaction between Self and the Other
Dialogical narratives also occur in intercultural settings. Regarding this, Bakhtin (1986) underlines the importance of dialogue and writes that:
In the realm of culture, outsidedness is a most powerful factor in understanding. It is only in the eyes of another culture that foreign culture reveals itself fully and profoundly…A meaning only reveals its depth once it has encountered and come into contact with another, foreign meaning; they engage in a kind of dialogue which surmounts the closedness and one-sidedness of these particular meanings, these cultures. (p. 7)
A diversity of cultural forms is required for cultural coexistence and peaceful interethnic relations (Kostogriz, 2005). Similarly, Bakhtin (1986) emphasizes the need to have dialogue with the Other for self-awareness and self-consciousness. Both individuals and different cultural and ethnic groups require the Other to define their identities. Therefore, Kostogriz (2005) argues that "to be in dialogue with the Other would mean to the individual consciousness getting out of itself and, in the space of 'outsidedness' and meeting another consciousness. The space between self and the Other becomes a space of in-between-ness" (p. 194). This process of self-distancing implies two possible outcomes. At one extreme, there is monologism which "denies the existence outside itself of another consciousness with equal rights and equal responsibilities" (Bakhtin, 1984, p. 292). In this case, denial might take the form of erasing any differences of the Other through misrecognition and/or by repression (Kostogriz, 2005). At the other extreme, self-negation occurs when "the self may become so bestowed with the other" that its inborn cultural identifications are devalued (Kostogriz, 2005, p. 194).
30
Bakhtin (1986) rejects both extremes and argues for the dialogical coexistence of difference. In that sense, a dialogical process is required to avoid binarism and to create "dialogical unity of polyphonic voices on the border between self and the Other" (Kostogriz, 2005, p. 191).
Nielsen (1987) also examines the interaction between self and the Other. Nielsen (1987) asserts that dialogical narratives emerge in social discourse when "the author (individual, group, class, nation) of the utterance anticipates implicitly or explicitly a rejoinder. It anticipates its other" (p. 141). Under this framework, a dialogical process develops when there is more than one separate discourse to explain, define or criticize any subject and "neither discourse can continue to develop without reference to its other" (p. 141). Nielsen (1987) gives the critique of the Other a central position in the dialogical process, arguing that "the other is thoroughly internalized and not simply an external empirical referent nor a mirror image" (p. 141). Nielsen`s (1987) study focuses on the social discourse of English-speaking Canadian and French-speaking Quebec societies as dialogical practices, examining how Quebec's social discourse emerges as a dialogical form in response to English Canada. Nielsen's (1987) study underlines the "virtual binary opposition" inherent in dialogical form since English Canada cannot define itself without referring to Quebec, just as Quebec cannot conceive itself without English Canada (p. 147).
Nielsen (1987) defines dialogical form as a cultural tool for alterity since it has the power to define, signify and differentiate any utterance. Taking dialogic narrative as a tool sheds light on the purposes of narrative. As Hernstein Smith (1981) writes, "no narrative version can be independent of a particular teller and occasion of telling" and as a result "every narrative version has been constructed in accord with some set of purposes or interests" (p. 215).
As an illustration, narratives have been employed to (re)define national identity and/or
31
national history. Wertsch (2000) examines the production of historical narratives in Russia focusing on history textbooks used in Soviet and post-Soviet high schools. This study demonstrates how official history changes over time as texts are (re)produced in line with contradictory views of historical events and circumstances. Although his study focuses on the transitional period from Soviet to post-Soviet official history, Wertsch (2000) emphasizes the fact that any nation-state attempts to produce and distribute "officially sanctioned narratives about their pasts" (p. 520). As with national histories, stories play important roles in (re)defining social histories and identities.
4. Identity and Dialogic Narration of a Public Space
According to Bakhtin, construction of identity is also a dialogic process because it requires assimilating, accepting and/or rejecting the discourses that surround an individual throughout life. Bakhtin (1986) argues that "the ideological becoming of [the] human being...is the process of selectively assimilating the world[s] of others" (p. 89). As individuals face new discourses, they continually revise their own identities in response. Each utterance acts as a compliance with, rejection, or criticism of others' utterances. But the process of identity construction is not connected only with individual others but also with sociocultural constructions, including places.
Scholarly tools that can be used to analyze public spaces include "reading the landscape as a text, decoding the built environment through analogy and metaphor, and the phenomenological experience of place" (Low, 2000, p. 49). Low (2000) defines the social production of space as a dialogical process that naturally includes some degree of conflict in itself.
32
Studying the discourse of public space, scholars have both highlighted the dialectic relationship between memory and the past (Katriel, 1994) and the dialogical processes of multiple voices (Bruner & Gorfain, 1984). Public space can be read as a narration about social relations (Low, 2000) since people react to places consistent with the meanings those places have for them (Rapoport, 1982). Katriel (1994), in her study of heritage museums in Israel, noted the coexistence of the two orientations toward the past in the narratives of tour guides and of museum displays. She defines heritage museums as "cultural sites of articulation of this very basic tension of history and memory" (p. 16).
On the other hand, Bruner and Gorfain (1984) assert that "no story is 'a' story or 'the' story but rather a dialogic process of many historically situated particular tellings" (p. 57). Focusing on the story of the mountain fortress of Masada, the authors describe how narratives of a specific place evolve over time in response to changing circumstances and reflect the socio-ideological conflicts that are in play within a society at a given cultural moment. Bruner and Gorfain (1984) describe the various tellings and interpretations of the same story as a processof dialogic narration. Their focus on the concept of dialogic narration emphasizes how narratives about a public space respond and interact with each other, with communities and their histories, and with the individuals in those communities.
In contrast to Katriel's (1994) binary approach to the discourse of public space, Bruner and Gorfain (1984) present a broader view that includes multiple voices in discourses of public space. Because Mostar's Old Bridge is located in a multiethnic society and partially under the jurisdiction of international authorities, an approach emphasizing the existence and negotiation of diverse voices is more suitable for the analysis of narratives about Old Bridge.
33
Old Bridge in Mostar represents a unique public space since it can be interpreted both as a bridge dividing the east-Bosnian Muslim side from the west-Croat Catholic side, and as a connecting bridge, considering the intermarriages and presence of different ethnic and religious groups on both geographical sides. According to this framework, Mostar Bridge provides a microcosm of the society where different identities encounter and negotiate in the public space. As the historical account of Mostar demonstrates, Old Bridge has been simultaneously a tourist attraction; a national monument of Bosnia-Herzegovina; a UNESCO world heritage site; a subject of poetry; a symbol of multiculturalism; and even a battlefield. Each of these orientations presents different narrative constructions of the Old Bridge.
Understanding any given narration, not as something stable but as a flexible, organic process, this study will look at how narratives about Old Bridge have evolved and changed. This approach will allow us to see Old Bridge's "narration as a process, always in production, in dialogic interplay, emergent and indeterminate, which exists in and helps to create a social world of virtuality, potentiality, and inquiry" (Bruner & Gorfain, 1984, p. 74).
Dialogic narration theory has been chosen as the ground for this study for several reasons. First, narratives used in defining a public space cannot be reduced to a binary relationship since public spaces are usually politically, economically and culturally contested places. Second, the polyvocality of voices representing public space has become even more common, if not the rule, with the increasing role of international organizations vis-à-vis nation-states. The polyvocality of voices reflects the complexity of the social and cultural dynamics within the society. Third, intended meanings attached to public spaces by global authorities such as supranational organizations are not passively received by locals; the social reality of a country often differs from globally imposed perceptions.
34
For these reasons, dialogic narration theory will be used in this study to shed light on opposed and evolving meanings of Old Bridge, as residents of Mostar construct their own and their city's identities. It allows us not only to explore how the discourse of public space is presented, but more importantly allows us to examine how residents of Mostar use competing discourses to construct meanings of Old Bridge and of their own identities.
D. Bosnia-Herzegovina: History and Current Situation
Todorova (2009) defines Bosnia as the "cultural paradigm" of the Balkans because of its multiple cultural identities, a reminder of its two imperial legacies—the Ottoman and the Habsburg. In Bosnia, Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs are Eastern European Slavs who speak Serbo-Croatian with a Bosnian accent. The only way to distinguish someone`s ethnic identity in Bosnia is by first or last names. However, even this is problematic because intermarriage among Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks has been common practice in Bosnia, the most ethnically integrated republic of Yugoslavia.
As in other Balkan countries, Bosnia is a heterogeneous place where Ottoman cultural memories intermingle with those of the nationalist and socialist eras (Malcolm, 2002; Todorova, 2004). Understanding current political, social and cultural components of Bosnia-Herzegovina requires a historical overview of events in which great European powers played substantial roles; thus, the history of Bosnia-Herzegovina can be divided into five periods: pre-Ottoman, Ottoman, Austrian-Hungarian, Yugoslavian, and the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Each period has affected the construction of cultural identities in Bosnia-Herzegovina in diverse ways, placing the country in a unique position in terms of European political and cultural history (Malcolm, 2002; Mazower, 2002).
35
1. Pre-Ottoman
Historical accounts of Bosnia usually start with the arrival of the Slavs in the Balkan region in 6th and 7th centuries (Malcolm, 2002; Mazower, 2002). Donia and Fine (1994) argue that "Bosnians come from the same Slavic base as today's Serbs and Croats" (p. 14), two other Slavic tribes that arrived in the Balkans subsequently and simultaneously. Considering the complex medieval history of Bosnia, particularly the shifting territories and alliances among Croats, Serbs and the Byzantine Empire until its emergence as an independent state in the 1180s, the question of whether the residents of Bosnia were Croat or Serb could not be answered. Malcolm (2002) solves this problem by simply defining the ethnic identity of the Bosnians as "the Slavs who lived in Bosnia" (p. 12).
Throughout the medieval period, the Bosnians themselves used "Bosnian" not as an ethnic label but to denote a shared geographical identity (Donia & Fine, 1994). During the Middle Ages, three faiths were dispersed in specific geographical regions: "Catholics to the north, west and from 1340s the center (especially in towns); the [Eastern] Orthodox in the south and east; and the Bosnian Church in the center" (Donia & Fine, 1994, p. 36).
Malcolm (2002) calls Bosnia "the microcosm of the Balkans" (p. 1), arguing that racial diversity is not an exception but the rule in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In the absence of typical or defining physical characteristics for Bosnians, Malcolm (2002) asserts that a wide variety of different genes and racial types played roles in the creation of this "human mosaic" (p. 1).
Although Bosnia`s heavily mountainous geography protected it from direct invasions over time, it also enabled the existence and preservation of diverse racial types by providing refuge for a variety of social and ethnic groups (Mazower, 2002). Donia and Fine (1994) define Bosnia as "no-man's land" (p. 17).
36
Bosnia's mountainous geography not only led to localism and regionalism but also the emergence of an independent Bosnian church from independent international Catholicism, regarded as the most distinctive feature of the medieval Bosnian state (Malcolm, 2002). Since the Bosnian church operated on its own terms, removed from the authority of Catholic Church, it was accused of heresy, which played a role in its identification with the Bogomils, a Manichean sect of Bulgaria. However, Donia and Fine (1994) refute this argument, adding that the Bosnian Church weakened over time and gradually disappeared following the arrival of the Ottomans as its members converted to Islam, Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
2. Ottoman
Mazower (2000) notes the tendency of Balkan historians to view Ottoman rule as a "degrading foreign dominance which interrupted for approximately four hundred years their participation in European history" (p. xli). On the other hand, Todorova (2009) criticizes Balkan nations for viewing Ottoman Empire as a scapegoat for their problems, arguing that the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans region not only provided the historical name of the region but also maintained a longer and more stable political unity than has been experienced in the region during any other period.
The current peculiar religious and ethnic structure of Bosnia is acknowledged as an "Ottoman legacy" (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002; Mazower, 2002; Todorova, 2009). Following the arrival of the Ottomans, the religious composition of Bosnian society changed enormously. Scholars (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002; Mazower, 2002) refute the claim that conversions to Islam occurred en masse, rather than as a gradual, multidirectional, and voluntary process, thanks primarily to the fact that conversion to Islam had certain economic and social advantages, such as lower taxes and privileged positions in the local administration.
37
Primarily, the Ottoman Empire had no interest in increasing conversions to Islam since Muslims paid lower taxes (Mazower, 2002).
The large number of conversions to Islam could be related to the lack of a strong Christian tradition in Bosnia since no Church in the region has had strong territorial organization (Malcolm, 2002). Donia and Fine (1994) describe the conversion process as "acceptance" since Islam did not bring significant changes and converts kept most of their local customs and Christian practices. Indeed, Bosnian Muslims even continued to use the Slav system of patronymic names (Malcolm, 2002).
Nevertheless, the dominant position of Muslims in local administration and the second-class status of Christians in Bosnia left a negative perception of an Ottoman legacy of prejudice against the Turks (Donia & Fine, 1994). Yet this legacy does not constitute a centuries-old hatred, as evidenced by the existence of harmonious relations between all the groups that continued to live together in the region and the lack of ethnic and/or religious clashes during both the Ottoman era and Medieval times (Malcolm, 2002). Mazower (2002) points to the presence of separate but parallel religious institutions during the Ottoman era and "an unparalleled degree of religious tolerance" compared to wider European practices (p. 54). Therefore, scholars (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002) tend to view local struggles within Bosnia as economic conflicts stemming from feudal conditions.
Because the Ottomans categorized their subjects according to the millet system of religious affiliation, religion has been the dominant signifier of group identity in Bosnia (Donia & Fine, 1994; Faroqhi, 2007; Imber, 2002; Inalcik, 2000; Schuman, 2004). Religious differences led to different cultural practices in daily life, including education, cuisine, dress, music, and so on (Donia & Fine, 1994; Inalcik, 2000). Yet ethnicity and religion did not play an overly
38
dominant role, as seen in the fact that marriages between Muslims and Christians were common (Mazower, 2002; Schuman, 2004). Ethnic cleavage within the towns was rare, though it was common to find rural villages populated by particular ethno-religious groups (Donia & Fine, 1994).
3. Austria-Hungarian
Following the occupation in 1878, the Austrian administration introduced the notion of bošnjaštvo (Bosnianism) as "patriotic loyalty to Bosnia itself as an alternative to separate Croatian, Serbian, or Muslim identities" (Donia & Fine, 1994, p. 97). The aim was to avoid ethnic and religious conflict in Bosnia by creating a superior, inclusive identity. Sarajevo`s Provincial Museum was founded to encourage Bosnians to see themselves as a unified people (Schuman, 2004). Yet Bosnianism failed to resonate against the powerful ethnic and religious identities in the region (Donia & Fine, 1994; Mazower, 2002). Bosnian Catholics began to define themselves as Croats, while the Bosnian Orthodox viewed themselves as Serbs; yet Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) continued to define themselves as a religious community, rather than as a nationality, until the twentieth century (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002).
The struggle between Christian peasants and Muslim landlords continued during Austrian rule since the socioeconomic structure of Ottoman era was retained. The changes brought by the Austrian administration were mostly in the fields of communication, transport and industry which led to growth and prosperity of Bosnian cities (Donia & Fine, 1994).
Although Gellner (1997) argues that nationalism cannot develop in agrarian societies where people are attached to particular estates and territories, nationalism did emerge in Bosnia despite the region's relative backwardness. Gellner (1997) defines this process as the exception because, in the Balkan case, the overlords and the rebels were from different cultures and
39
religions. The power struggle between Muslim overlords and Christian rebels could easily be transformed into a nationalist struggle. In the words of Gellner (1997), "bandit-rebels in Balkan mountains, knowing themselves to be culturally distinct from those they were fighting, and moreover linked, by faith or loss-of-faith, to a new uniquely powerful civilisation, thereby became ideological bandits: in other words, nationalists" (p. 42).
During the Second World War, Bosnia witnessed multidimensional conflict in a civil war between national extremists and local resistance forces and a revolutionary struggle advocated by the Communist Party of Josip Broz Tito, in addition to war against Germany and its fascist allies (Donia & Fine, 1994). Nazi Germany created the "Independent State of Croatia" led by the Croatian Ustasha regime, a puppet state that covered Croatia and most of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The systematic violence of the Ustasha regime towards other ethnic groups led to radicalization of interethnic relations within the country and later provoked Serbian Chetniks to take revenge against Croats, Muslims and others suspected of Ustasha sympathies (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002).
4. Yugoslavia
Against the German invasion in 1941, the Communist Party of Yugoslavia organized a guerilla resistance under the leadership of Tito. Despite lack of military combat experience, Tito and his partisans were able to defeat Germans and create a Yugoslav ideal under the Communist Party's principle of "Bratstvo i jedinstvo (brotherhood and unity)" (Donia & Fine, 1994).
The Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia was composed of five key nationalities: Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Macedonians, and Montenegrins. Although Tito's nationality model extended the right of nationalities to secede, in reality the Party organization acted as the central authority to avoid that eventuality.
40
Bosnia and Herzegovina was designated as the sixth federal unit, in addition to five other republics. Schuman (2004) describes Bosnia Herzegovina as an "anomaly" among the Yugoslav republics for being the most ethnically diverse republic, composed of Serbian Orthodox Christians, Croatian Catholics and Muslims, and lacking any national majority. Although Bosnian Muslims were not included in the list of key nationalities at the time, their special status was emphasized by Tito several times in order to maintain their support (Donia & Fine, 1994, Malcolm, 2002). In 1968, the Yugoslav Communist Party accepted Bosnian Muslims as a distinct nation (Malcolm, 2002).
Titoism instilled a variety of social and economic policies that altered Yugoslavian society at all levels. Titoist economic policies not only industrialized Bosnia but also led to urbanization, which played an important role in the erosion of ethnic differences. Bosnian cities acted as melting pots where the sharing of schools and workplaces led to mixed marriages. However, rapid urbanization also increased discrepancies between urbanites and segregated peasants. Therefore, it is argued that the dichotomy between peasants and urbanites played a role in the Bosnian War, since peasants were more inclined to join ethnic militias (Donia & Fine, 1994; Grodach, 2002).
During Tito's term, a common Yugoslav identity was introduced as a cultural identity since communism discouraged the role of religion (Schuman, 2004). Furthermore, under socialism the practice of using names to denote ethnic background was replaced with using neutral names which made it more difficult to decide one's ethnic identity through her/his name (Donia & Fine, 1994). Rather than a specific ethnic identity, a Yugoslavian national identity developed, strengthened by widespread intermarriage in Bosnia (Malcolm, 2002).
41
The policies of Tito, however, were criticized for leading to more fragmentation at the federal level. Further decentralization and fragmentation of power resulted in a political stalemate, and each of the republics began to act like sovereign mini-states. Tito's death in May 1980 removed "the guiding hand of a great arbitrator" and the disintegration process of Yugoslavia started (Donia & Fine, 1994, p. 191).
5. Dissolution of Yugoslavia
Banac (1988) prophetically viewed Yugoslavia as an artificial construction that would eventually suffer from the competing national identities of its republics. Accordingly, following Tito's death, Yugoslavia not only faced economic problems but also national disagreements at various levels. This process led to the dissolution of three basic institutions that had previously maintained the country`s stability: the League of Communists of Yugoslavia; the Yugoslav Federal Government; and the Yugoslav People's Army (Donia & Fine, 1994). Particularly, the Yugoslav People's Army played an essential role in the dissolution of Yugoslavia since it evolved from a national defense organization into a military organization acting under Serbian interests (Silber & Little, 1997).
The post-Tito period also witnessed the emergence of various republican governments and radical nationalists. One prominent nationalist leader of post-Tito era was Slobodan Milošević, President of Serbia. The rise of Serb nationalism under the Milošević's leadership, with the aim of creating an enlarged Serbian state, played enormous role in the eruption of Bosnian War (Malcolm, 2002; Silber & Little, 1997). Milošević's policies of ethnic manipulation instilled the idea that a peaceful coexistence was no longer attainable and urged the other nations of Yugoslavia to fight for their independence.
42
Dissolution of Yugoslavia began with a referendum in Slovenia, in which 88% of Slovenians in December 1990 voted for separation from Yugoslavia (Donia & Fine, 1994). Then, on June 25, 1991, both Slovenia and Croatia declared their independence. Considering the relatively ethnically homogenous status of Slovenia, the declaration process occurred smoothly. However, separation from the Yugoslavia Federation was bloody for both Croatia and Bosnia.
When the first multiparty election took place in Bosnia Herzegovina in December 1990, three parties, each representing different ethnicities won election. Initially a kind of pluralism emerged with a coalition among the parties; but the political stalemate eventually dominated Bosnia and local and external pressures later turned into full-scale war.
Bosnian Muslims and Croatian leaders favored a sovereign Bosnia, whereas Serbians disagreed (Malcolm, 2002; Silber & Little, 1997). When the European Commission recognized Bosnia as an independent state on April 6, 1992, the Bosnian War began with an act of symbolic violence that targeted unarmed civilian peace demonstrators composed of Bosnia's three ethnicities—Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims (Donia & Fine, 1994). Indeed, on that day the hopes of preserving a multiethnic Bosnian society were shattered by the weapons of nationalist extremists. Sporadic shootings later turned into a full-scale war.
Throughout the war, Bosnian Muslims aimed to maintain control of the cities, viewing them as the "political base for Bosnia as a multinational society" in consideration of their multiethnic structure and general tolerance among different ethnic and religious groups (Donia & Fine, 1994, p. 241). Serbian and Croatian forces, on the other hand, aimed to create their own ethnically homogenous monolithic territories (Malcolm, 1992; Silber & Little, 1997). Gellner (1997) points to the difficulties of applying principles of self-determination in Eastern Europe, due to the ethnic complexities characteristic of the region. Gellner (1997) argues that the region's
43
newly established states were mostly "minority-haunted" since their geographic, historic and demographic principles did not correspond to each other (p. 44). The aim of creating a homogenous state thus led to "ethnic cleansing," as witnessed during the "Yugoslav tragedy" (p. 46).
Initially, the international community regarded the Bosnian War as a cultural conflict, relating it to ancient hatreds in the region. International intervention emerged as a humanitarian response accusing all sides of the conflict and applying a UN arms embargo. Scholars (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002; Todorova, 2009) refute claims that the Bosnian war was a result of ancient mutual hatreds. According to Todorova (2009), the tendency to view Balkan atrocities as a cultural pattern is both overgeneralized and pseudoscientific. Similarly, Donia and Fine (1994) criticize the labeling of the Bosnian War as "ethnic," arguing that Bosnia has had its own peculiar history and culture and that the "Bosnian" identity was shared and felt by all religious groups living in the region (p. 7). The dissolution of Yugoslavia was a systematic process planned by political leaders who were afraid of losing power in a peaceful transition (Malcolm, 2002; Silber & Little, 1997).
In his book Ethnicity Without Groups, Brubaker (2006) also questions the role of ethnicity in both political and military conflicts. Brubaker (2006) criticizes the academic tendency of taking "bounded groups as fundamental units of analysis" (p. 2) as if they always comprise homogenous actors. Brubaker (2006) emphasises the requirement of distancing ourselves from the view that any political leader or religious organization represents a particular group and speaks in line with that particular group's interests and claims. Rather than using groupist language such as "the Serbs" killed "the Bosnian Muslims," Brubaker (2006) suggests a more dynamic and relational analysis of group formation focusing on their everyday experience.
44
The war in Bosnia did not occur because of the complicated ethnic structure of Bosnian society; various external developments paved the way for this vicious war, including the changing mission of the Yugoslav People`s Army, the ambitions of Croatian and Serbian governments to annex Bosnia, and the growing strength of national extremists through military assistance from neighboring countries (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002; Todorova, 2009).
The Dayton Peace Agreement was signed under pressure from Western powers and ended the Bosnian War. Negotiated in Dayton, Ohio, and signed in Paris on December 14, 1995 (OHR, 2010), the Dayton Peace Agreement also established the Office of High Representative (OHR), which is "an ad hoc international institution responsible for overseeing implementation of civilian aspects of the accord ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina" (OHR, 2010). The OHR—in cooperation with the people and institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina—supports the country's transformation into a peaceful and stable democracy.
The Dayton Peace Agreement divided the country into two separate entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (governed and mostly populated by Bosniaks and Croats) and Republika Srpska (governed and mostly populated by Serbs). Each have extensive powers of self-government, including right to establish their own constitution; their own defense and police structures; and to pursue external and trade relations with other countries (Schuman, 2004). In addition to the two large entities, Brcko was, due to its strategic location, established as a self-governing administrative unit. The Dayton Peace Agreement also established the Central Presidency which oversees the two entities and appoints the Federal Council of Ministers. The Central Presidency acts as a co-presidency composed of three elected heads of state; one Bosniak and one Croat elected by the citizens of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and one elected by the people of Republika Srpska. Three elected presidents rotate the Presidency every
45
eight months. The candidate who gets the most votes also serves as the Chairman of the Presidency. The Presidency is responsible for conducting Bosnia and Herzegovina's foreign policy, as well as signing international treaties and appointing ambassadors and country representatives to international organizations.
The Agreement was criticized for allowing the creation of de facto states within the central state of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Malcolm, 2002; Schuman, 2004). The international community is increasingly regarded by the local community as outsiders and intervening foreigners in post-war Bosnia, after claiming to act as a neutral and universally positioned superior to the local state and community (Schuman, 2004).
The Dayton Peace Agreement aimed to reconstruct a multi-ethnic Bosnia and Herzegovina through the decentralization of power, protection of minorities' interests and a guarantee of group rights at all levels of government and administration. Therefore, the Agreement guaranteed the protection of all religious groups and minorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina by putting a special clause into the country`s constitution: "No person shall be deprived of Bosnia and Herzegovina or Entity citizenship on any ground such as sex, race, color, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status" (Schuman, 2004, p. 82).
Most importantly, for preserving the unified Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Agreement provided a Constitution for Bosnia and Herzegovina to be overseen by the Office of High Representative, appointed by the Peace Implementation Council. The Agreement gave the crucial roles of long-term peacekeeping and managing democratization processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina to international authorities. Considering the requirement of protecting minorities in a democratic society and of free elections, international actors promoted multiculturalism to
46
maintain peace and stability. Accommodating ethnic and cultural diversity is regarded as a prerequisite for the survival of the state.
For the security and stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina, integration with European institutions has seen essential. Particularly, the EU is committed to strengthen the rule of law in the country through its projects and funds. Moreover, the EU still has military presence in the country in line with its EUFOR/Althea mission and works toward capacity building of the Bosnian army (EU Commission, 2016). Bosnia and Herzegovina were named as potential candidates for EU membership at the Thessaloniki European Council Summit in July 2003. On February 15, 2016, Bosnia and Herzegovina submitted its application for EU membership (European Commission, 2016). As EU Member States accepted its membership application on September 20, 2016, a long process of accession negotiations has started for Bosnia and Herzegovina.
It is against this historical context that, in the following section, I examine the Old Bridge and the city of Mostar, which are regarded as symbols of multiculturalism in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
E. Research Site: Old Bridge and Mostar
The metaphor "bridge" has been common to the self-perception of the Balkan nations, which were located at the crossroads of civilizations (Grodach, 2002). The metaphor of the "bridge" has been used interchangeably to emphasize boundaries between the imagined worlds of east and west, and as connecting points between Christianity and Islam. As a 16th century pedestrian bridge, Old Bridge, standing across the river Neretva and connecting both sides of the city of Mostar in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been used to situate a narrative that has (re)defined Mostar throughout history.
47
Pašić (2006) describes Old Bridge as "the most beautiful expression of productive coexistence in Bosnia and Herzegovina" (p. vii). According to Silber and Little (1997), during the Bosnian War, "multi-ethnicity was itself the enemy" (p. 291). Thus, the destruction of the Old Bridge symbolized the death of multi-ethnic Bosnia and Herzegovina, just as its reconstruction today symbolizes the rebuilding of that society.
Mostar has preserved the influences of the many cultures in its architecture and customs of daily life, including pre-Ottoman, Ottoman, Austria-Hungarian and Mediterranean. Indeed, Mostar has always been a multi-religiousand multi-ethnic city. A short history of Mostar will help us to understand the social, cultural and economic composition of the city.
1. Mostar: Before the 1992-1995 War
Habitation in the valley of Mostar dates back to the prehistoric era and Roman Empire (Pašić, 2006). A document dated 1440, referring to the bridge on the Neretva river, has been regarded as the first historic reference to the location of present-day Mostar (Pašić, 2006, p. 2). Archeological excavations in 2003 uncovered a previous wooden bridge and proved that there had been a settlement near the bridge before the Ottomans (Pašić, 2006, p. 17). Evliya Celebi, a world-known Ottoman traveler of the 17th century wrote about the aforementioned wooden bridge as follows: "According to Latin historians there used to be in this town a bridge across the Neretva river, hung on a sturdy chain as thick as a human leg" (Pašić, 2006, p. 28).
In 1468, the Ottomans took control of Blagaj and the closest fortresses to the bridge over Neretva. Initially, only twenty houses surrounded the bridge, and this small settlement was called Mostar in 1474, referring to the keepers of the bridge (Pašić, 2006, p. 5).
Considering the strategic role of a bridge on the main road between the Bosnian hinterland and the Adriatic Coast, the insecure bridge over Neretva was replaced with a timbered
48
one during the rule of Ottoman Sultan Fatih Mehmet (Pašić, 2006, p. 5). Then,Architect Hajruddin built the timbered bridge in 1566 at the same location because it provided "a short span over the river and river banks that were not too high" as well as a natural protection of the landscape (p. 19).
The Old Bridge was built following Mostar's ascendancy as an administrative center of the region under Ottoman rule during the Sultan Suleiman era. Construction took two years and cost 300,000 silver coins. The construction project was under the supervision of Zaim Mehmed Karadjozbeg, the brother of Rustem Pasa, the grand vizier and Sultan Suleyman's son-in-law (Pašić, 2006, p. 20).
Following the construction of the Old Bridge, Mostar witnessed rapid expansion and development, becoming a complete urban entity around 1670 (Pašić, 2006). As a hub for trade and communication, Mostar's geographic location played an important role in the city's development. Since the medieval fortress close to the bridge was essential for the Ottomans' communication system in the region, the city of Mostar developed rapidly around the fortress.
The development of Mostar represents a prominent example of urban transformation from a medieval settlement to an important Ottoman-style town (Pašić, 2006). During the construction of the Old Bridge, numerous public buildings, including madrasas, imarets, hamams, mosques, and the bazaar (carsiya) developed on both sides of the bridge. During this period, the mahalas, the traditional Ottoman neighborhoods, a type of residential micro-regions were also formed (Pašić, 2006; Yarwood, 1998).
During the Ottoman era, every mahala had its own facilities required for daily life, such as mosques, madrasas and a mutual-aid system that supported social cohesion and balance between poor and wealthy residents (Inalcik, 2000; Pašić, 2006). There were no religious or
49
ethnic divisions in the mahala structure, as Muslims and Christians lived together in the same mahalas (Malcolm, 2002; Pašić, 2006). Yet the Eastern Orthodox population was mostly concentrated in East Mostar, with Catholics in the West (Pašić, 2006, p. 11).
When Austro-Hungarians annexed Herzegovina on August 5, 1878, they introduced new administrative and legal rules that affected almost every aspect of daily life and transformed the city from an Ottoman town into a European city with new roads, public lighting and railways. Yet the Ottoman character of the city was preserved since most of the new buildings were built on the west bank of the Neretva (Yarwood, 1998).
During the Austro-Hungarian period, the structure of Old Bridge was restored and strengthened to accommodate increasing pedestrian traffic and to repair wear and tear (Pašić, 2006). Although the Germany Army left explosives on the Old Bridge during its withdrawal, the Old Bridge survived the Second World War with only minor damages (Malcolm, 2002; Pašić, 2006).
During both the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian periods, the religious diversity of Mostar was respected and protected. The Ottoman Empire encouraged the building of Christian churches, such as St. Peter and St. Paul, which were completed under Ottoman rule in 1866 (Yarwood, 1998). Similarly, Islamic-style buildings were built and Arabic education was taught in madrasas when Mostar was under Austro-Hungarian control.
Under the Yugoslavia Federation, Mostar developed rapidly both as a tourist and an industrial center. The resulting migration from throughout Yugoslavia changed the demographics of the city and enhanced its multicultural character.
According to the 1991 Census, the population of Mostar was 35% Muslim, 34% Croat, 19% Serb and the remainder Jews and Yugoslavs (Yarwood, 1998). At that time, Mostar had a
50
population of 126,067; 83,686 were living within the city and suburban villages. The urban population of Mostar consisted of 34% Muslims, 29% Croats, 19 % Serbs, 15% Yugoslavs, and 3% other groups (p. 2). Considering the fact that one-third of marriages were mixed, Mostar was regarded as a harmonious multi-ethnic society (Inalcik, 2000; Malcolm, 2002; Yarwood, 1998).
2. Mostar: During and After the 1992-1995 War
One of the most bitter battles of the Bosnian War took place in Mostar between the Croats and Bosniaks (Malcolm, 2002; Silber & Little, 1997). Mostar, once regarded as a microcosm of Bosnia and Herzegovina for its exemplary multiculturalism, became a city divided between Croats and Bosniaks. Mostar was devastated by two sieges. The first between the Croats and the Bosniaks against the Serbs continued from April 1992 until early July 1992. The second was a conflict between the Croats and the Bosniaks from May 1993 to February 1994 (Yarwood, 1998).
At the end of two sieges, the city of Mostar was completely destroyed, including architecture that had reflected historic Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian influences. Almost all the historic buildings, including "every mosque, Orthodox churches, Austro-Hungarian Bath, Hotel Neretva, Waqf Palace, Metropolitan Palace and finally the Old Bridge" were destroyed during the war (Pašić, 2006, p. 43). The Old Bridge in Mostar was demolished on November 9, 1993, during initial shelling from Serbian artillery that began in April 1992 and finished in subsequent Croat bombings that began in May 1993. Following the destruction of Old Bridge, a temporary bridge was built.
The destruction of Old Bridge in Mostar disappointed Bosnians who had hoped for the reconstruction of a multiethnic society in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Donia & Fine, 1994; Malcolm, 2002; Pašić, 2006). The partition of Bosnia and Herzegovina into quasi-ethnic regions
51
after the war changed the composition of the population and the ethnic structures of the city. Serbians were displaced or migrated to the Serb-dominated Republica Srpska, while Bosniaks and Croats stayed in Mostar under the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (shared by Croats and Bosniaks).
After the war, Mostar was segregated into a Muslim area on the east side of the Neretva River and a more developed Croat side on the west (Schuman, 2004, p. 126). Although Serbs who migrated to the Serb-dominated parts of the country during the war have recently started to return to the city, Mostar today is largely a Bosniak-Croat city. The population of Mostar was 126,662 in 1991. There has been no information about the ethnic composition of the city until recently. Following the war, and until 2013, ethnic and religious questions were excluded from the census due to continuing sensitivities. The results of the 2013 census were published on June 30, 2016 by the BiH Agency for Statistics (Stojanovski, 2016). According to 2013 census,2 Mostar has a population of 105,797. Mostar is 44.2% Bosniak, 48.4% Croat, 4.2 % Serbs, and 3.2% others. A comparison of 1991 and 2013 censuses depict an increase in Bosniaks and Croats as Serbs left the city, despite the fact that the population of the city decreased since the war (see Appendix B for Mostar Census Results).
Initial efforts by international organizations such as the EU to reintegrate Mostar did not succeed due to strong resistance from locals. Mostar became more a divided city, organized into six municipalities and a central zone with equal sharing of authority. Furthermore, nearly all the local administrative structures, including health care, public education, infrastructure and communication systems were divided. Political and institutional divisions have had repercussions on the daily lives of residents as well.
2 http://www.statistika.ba/
52
3. Rebuilding the Old Bridge
Following the signing of the Dayton Agreement, restoration of Mostar Bridge was initiated and overseen by a scientific committee established by UNESCO. The project was funded by international financial aid, particularly from Italy, Turkey, France and the Netherlands.
The project started in 2000 and the Old Bridge was reconstructed by July 2004; its inauguration ceremony was held on July 23, 2004, with a strong international official presence from donor countries (Pašić, 2006).
The Old Bridge and its towers were designated as a National Monument of Bosnia and Herzegovina in July 2004, and the Old Bridge Area of the Old City of Mostar was included on the World Heritage List in July 2005 (UNESCO, 2010).
UNESCO's World Heritage List currently includes 890 properties (689 cultural, 176 natural, and 25 mixed properties), representing humans’ cultural and natural heritage (UNESCO, 2010). The properties are chosen by the World Heritage Committee, the main institutional body responsible for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, which includes the criteria and guidelines for the inscription of properties. The list includes unique places such as Egypt's Great Pyramids; Turkey's Archeological Site of Troy; China's Great Wall; and the United States’ Grand Canyon National Park.
UNESCO's World Heritage List is conspicuously universal; the sites included in the list "belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located" (UNESCO, 2010). UNESCO justifies the inscription of Old Bridge by defining the bridge and surrounding area as "an exceptional and universal symbol of coexistence of communities from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds" (UNESCO, 2010). The Old Bridge area
53
presents a true example of a multicultural urban settlement thanks to architectural features that include pre-Ottoman, Ottoman, Mediterranean and European traces and welcomes tourists from all around the world (UNESCO, 2010).
F. Research Questions and Rationale
This study provides an ethnographic analysis of political, historical, economic and sociocultural contexts of Old Bridge as a public space. Specifically, I explore the ways in which residents of Mostar make sense of Old Bridge to construct their identities in a divided city, and compare/situate local narratives with global representations of Old Bridge to uncover layers of dialogic voices, each grounded in its unique contexts.
Research on public space primarily deals with the social production of public space with a focus on political economic theory (Bourdieu, 1977; Castells, 1983; de Certau, 1984; Harvey, 1985; King, 1980; Lefebvre, 1991; Zukin, 1991). Although cultural aspects of public space have been studied by anthropologists (Low, 2000; Myers, 1997; Richardson, 1982), less is known about how individuals define and experience a specific public space. As Low (2000) wrote, in the process of studying official representations and formal definitions of public spaces, "local stories go untold" (p. 33). In the midst of Mostar's post-war rebuilding activities, less attention has been given to the views of local residents and how their views may diverge from or be in conflict with representations of Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism by national and supranational authorities.
Globalization influences individuals in diverse ways as structural changes transform their daily lives according to different scales. Although there is no universal experience of globalization, one could argue that "globalization is real to almost everyone" by changing our time-space perceptions as well as introducing us to new institutions (Lechner & Boli, 2008, p.
54
120), a depiction that vividly describes Mostar residents. Globalization studies (Albrow, 2008; Sassen, 1991) that focus on space have mostly focused on the development of global cities where immigrants find ways to connect to their own cultures as they travel beyond them. My study will present another aspect of globalization, focusing on locals' interpretations of space and the effects of international organizations such as UNESCO in the representation of local spaces.
This study aims to share the voices of locals that have thus far been ignored.Accordingly, the study will focus on representations of Old Bridge as a symbol ofmulticulturalism by national and supranational authorities, and examine the extent to which theserepresentations resonate with interpretations by the residents of Mostar.
More specifically, there is little research on contested meanings attached to public spaces among global and national authorities and locals living in divided cities of post-conflict societies. This lack of research is problematic for several reasons. In particular, in post-conflict societies such as Mostar, where locals belong to diverse cultural, ethnic and religious groups, residents continue to live in divided cities (physically and/or metaphorically), and symbolic aspects of public space gain importance in terms of political, economic and cultural meanings embedded in the built environment. Research is needed to understand the social construction of space under conditions of conflict and contestation, whether they take the form of military, political or economic conflict. Exploring the ways in which residents draw on different meanings of public space, identity and globalization to make sense of and evaluate their experiences can also help us to further understand theoretical claims about such interconnected phenomena.
The study will further lead to a greater understanding of the extent to which peace-building through place-building has worked in Mostar. By presenting an insider's perspective,
55
this study will also help government institutions and international organizations in designing future policies in post-conflict societies.
56
III. METHODOLOGY
The current study examines the extent to which global authoritative voices of international organizations and voices of the state connect with local individual experiences in defining Old Bridge. Because meaning stands as a cultural tool to understand how locals perceive and experience public spaceand because detailed narratives would help to understand the fabric of society in Mostar, qualitative research was chosen as the most appropriate method of data collection and analysis for this study.
A. Qualitative Research
Qualitative research aims at defining, understanding, and analyzing the structure and patterns of the any organization, community or group studied. Researchers present a naturalistic view of the community by getting insight into members' attitudes, behaviors and meanings. Carey (1989) defines qualitative research as the "process of making large claims from small matters" (p. 64). Through fieldwork, qualitative researchers try to develop a grounded understanding of the perspectives of the members of the community and analyze the social behaviors of the groups studied (Sanders, 1980, p. 158).
Rather than testing hypotheses, qualitative research intends to provide a "richly detailed description of a segment of the social world" (Singleton, Straits, & Straits, 1993, p. 320). This methodology is particularly suitable for exploring the globalized world. As globalization affects even small geographical spaces, Appadurai (1996) writes that ethnography might act as "a special voice in a transnational, deterritorialized world" (p. 54) where individual lives are shaped by distant forces.
Qualitative research applies various methods including but not limited to interviews, examination of historical materials, observation, and focus-groups. This study employed three
57
major qualitative methods: document analysis, observation, and interviewing. These methods have been chosen to provide a multivocal and multidimensional representation of a specific public space. Using these methods enabled me to simultaneously compare and analyze the study's findings at different levels.
The use of multiple methods is a common practice in qualitative research. With its focus on interpretation, utilizing multiple data sets, theories, methodologies, or a combination of these, will allow me to probe deeper into the construction and contestation of meanings by parties of divergent interests and stances, thus adding depth and richness to the inquiry.
B. Document Analysis
In order to show the evolution of conceptualizations of Old Bridge, text data was collected from different sources, including official and local records as well as the reports of international organizations on Old Bridge; written display materials at the Old Bridge Museum; brochures by the Tourism Information Bureau on Old Bridge; tour guidebook; and newspaper articles. Official reports, press releases and transcripts of speeches concerning Old Bridge were also examined. Documents of international organizations were either downloaded from the websites of organizations such as OHR, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and UNESCO, or collected during my field study.
Document analysis was used to explore supplemental data on Old Bridge.Text data included, for example, "World Heritage Review," an official publication of UNESCO World
58
Heritage Centre3; promotional and development reports of Old Town Agency4; and written display materials at the Old Bridge Museum5 about historical events related to the Old Bridge.
Promotional brochures by the Tourism Association of Bosnia and Herzegovina6 and the Herzegovina-Neretva Canton Tourist Board7, designed to attract tourists,were obtained through several visits during my field trips in 2011 and 2012 to the Tourism Information Bureau in Mostar and downloaded from their websites. These documents were examined to see how Old Bridge was defined and whether official representations differed from residents’ interview data.
Although television and radio broadcasts on Old Bridge and Mostar might beconsidered additional information sources, this study was based primarily on written sources, in line with my limited exposure to non-textual materials. I also sporadically used visual materials, such as photographs of the Old Bridge and surrounding area, when they were relevant or required to enhance the understanding of the issues mentioned in the study.
C. Observation
Both Old Bridge as a pedestrian bridge and those surrounding places known as Old Town were considered field sites for data collection (see Appendix C for Mostar Old Town Map). Those field sites provided me opportunities to meet locals, and to talk with and befriend them. I also visited other parts of the city, including the west part of Mostar when an interviewee requested we meet there (see Appendix D for the map of Mostar City). Those visits helped me see the differences between two parts of the city in terms of urbanization and economic development, and to have a better, more contextualized understanding of the Old Bridge.
3http://whc.unesco.org/
4http://www.asgmo.ba/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
5http://www.muzejhercegovine.com
6http://bhtourism.ba/eng/
7http://hercegovina.ba/index.php/bs/
59
It would be only by observing and understanding the daily activities of Mostar residents, their practices and experiences that I could shed light on the meanings and importance of Old Bridge for the residents. Thus, I followed the interpretiveapproach and studied Old Bridge at its location and tried to understand its importance for locals living in Mostar.Observations and field notes provided in-depth understanding of the daily routines of Mostar residents.
The ethnographic study was based on my field trips to the city of Mostar. I conducted trips in different seasonal periods in order to observe and reflect on various sociocultural and economic behaviors. Beginning my fieldwork in March 2011, and to cover different seasonal periods, I made five field visits: the first, two weeks in May 2011; the second, two weeks in June 2011; the third, a weekend in October 2011; the fourth, a weekend in February 2012; and the fifth, two weeks between the last week of June 2012 and the first week of July 2012. During each trip, I observed Old Bridge and its surroundings and started to conduct interviews in June 2012 after getting Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from my university.
During my first field trip in May 2011,I rented a room in a house 15 minutes’ walking distance from the Old Bridge in east part of Mostar. I thought that living with a local family would provide me a better understanding of locals’ daily lives. However, it turned out that the house I rented was a spare house owned by a Croat family which is only used as a rental for tourists. After staying two days in that house, my interaction with locals went no further than meeting the landlord to take the key and talking to his daughter on the phone about the instructions for operating the coffee machine. I decided to stay in an affordable motel just at the steps of Old Bridge. This prime location allowed me to observe Old Bridge both day and night. Furthermore, during all my five field trips the motel, in addition to being my living accommodations, served both as workplace and meeting place.
60
In the very first days of my fieldwork, I only observed Old Bridge as an outsider because I looked like a tourist in the eyes of locals. I crossed Old Bridge, walked around the narrow streets where there are souvenir shops, art galleries, cafes, restaurants, and postcard stands. Often I sat at one of the cafes, stopped to watch a diver jumping from the bridge, or took photos of Old Bridge from different angles (see Appendix E for photographs of Old Bridge).
As the days passed, I was able to get acquainted easily with locals who were working around Old Bridge. For instance, I started to see same shop owners, waiters, and sales assistants early in the mornings as they were walking on the Old Bridge to open their workplaces. Since Old Bridge and its surrounding Old Town are a compact area, after my second day in the motel, locals understood that I was not a regular tourist. Our initial conversations were mostly just greeting and talking about the weather. As I continued to hang around Old Bridge and observe its surroundings, locals saw my presence as a sign of willingness and commitment to understand Old Bridge and the city. Then locals started to be more interested in my research. As I was walking toward Old Bridge, to hear a local shouting and asking, "Hey! How are the interviews going?", became a regular feature of my fieldwork. Furthermore, locals helped me to arrange interviews with their friends and colleagues, which expanded my snowball sampling. This familiarity not only gave me data for my research but also provided me further credibility as a researcher.
During my initial trips, I stayed approximately three hours at a time at the research site and always wrote field notes in a small notebook. Following my increasing familiarity with the site and the people, and getting IRB approval, I stayed for longer time periods, depending on my interview schedules and comfort level. As Herbert says, ethnographic methods "rest upon participant observation...whereby the researcher spends considerable time observing and
61
interacting with a social group" (Herbert, 2000, p. 551). As much as possible, I engaged with locals in their everyday activities. Such engagement provided me further opportunities for my research. For instance, my initial attempts to get an interview with a Croat Priest were declined by the employees of the Croat Catholic Church on the grounds that the priests were busy. Then, one of my interviewees invited me to a wedding ceremony at the Croat Catholic Church, where, after the wedding, I could have a chance to meet with and interview a Croat Catholic Priest.
Although I opted to conduct one-to-one interviews to gather data, I also could observe how locals interacted in groups, since I was invited to social gatherings by many of my interviewees. For instance, Marija, a Croat student, invited me to attend an informal meeting of her university’s social club. The meeting took place at the university campus on the Wast side of Mostar. Although the university was located on the Croat side, there were both Croat and Bosniak participants. It was a lively event where young people intermingled. This type of event provided me opportunities to meet more locals but also showed me how interethnic groups socialize in Mostar. From the outside, it was impossible to tell which ethnic group an individual belonged to, unless you asked their name. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, names indicate one’s ethnic and religious identity. Yet many residents told me that currently families increasingly prefer neutral names for their children. Young students were socializing and talking about music, new trends and their vacation plans. I observed that young people refrained from talking about politics when they were in a multiethnic group. This highlights ongoing sensitivity toward specific issues, including the Bosnian War and religion.
During my fieldwork, I could also observe how one ethnic group communicates. One of my Bosniak interviewees invited me for drinks with her girlfriends at night. At this gathering, the group was composed of all Bosniak girls who in their mid-twenties. My interviewee, Lamija,
62
picked me from my motel. Lamija told me that we would meet her friends in a cafe located at the outskirts of Old Town closer to the Croat side. She told me the group does not prefer going to cafes around Old Bridge because those are more expensive and crowded with tourists. Then, we walked approximately ten minutes to reach the meeting place. The cafe was full of young people. Lamija and other Bosniak girls seemed like regulars there as the waiter called their names and helped our group arrange two tables to seat the eight of us. We had drinks and chatted about everything, including politics, all night. During this social gathering, I observed the diversity of views among Bosniaks as each Bosniak girl raised different opinions about political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Some supported an ethnic Bosniak political party while some were opting for a multiethnic party. Occasionally, they argued about the reasons for high unemployment in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Some accused political parties of lacking any strategy, and some accused the Dayton agreement. They unanimously agreed that all politicians are corrupt in Bosnia and Herzegovina. At the end of the night, the girls insisted that I must order banana palacinki (Bosnian style pancake) saying that I needed extra nutrition since I was pregnant then. We stopped at an outdoor food stand as we walked together back to my motel. While we were eating palacinki, we talked about my pregnancy and baby names.
This was not the only time that my gender played a role in the field. During the short breaks between my interviews, I often stopped at the same food stand to buy corn as a snack. The seller, an elderly Bosniak man, initially thought that I was a journalist, after seeing me talking with different people and taking notes. I told him about my research and requested an interview but he declined. Thereafter, when I was buying some corn, he started to offer me one serving free, saying, “this one is for the baby.” During my fieldwork, both Bosniaks and Croats have been truly supportive. I felt comfortable as there was mutual trust between us since my first day
63
in the field. On many occasions, they showed their hospitality, friendship and respect to me both as a researcher and as a guest.
I visited Mostar during both tourist and non-tourist seasons. For instance, spring and summer months are considered the touristic season for the city of Mostar; thus, the composition of the people using Old Bridge is quite different than in other seasons. In the summer, souvenir shops, cafes, restaurants and hotels located on the two sides of the bridge were usually filled with tourists (see Appendix E). During Fall and Winter seasons, the Old Bridge area is almost deserted and you can only see shopkeepers, restaurant owners and a few locals. Researching during non-tourist season is essential to understanding how locals use Old Bridge when there are fewer tourists.
On the main streets of large cities in Bosnia, the tradition of the evening stroll, known as the korso, still continues, where "friends [walked] together and met others or repaired to a local coffee shop for gossip" (Donia & Fine, 1994, p. 185). Drinking several cups of strong coffee is a typical way of socializing in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Schuman, 2004, p. 116). I began my observation and interacting with locals in cafes, restaurants, and motels and souvenir shops scattered on both sides of the Old Bridge. I spent time with Mostar residents over coffee, at mealtimes and just chatting and accompanying them (see Appendix F for photographs of Bosanski Coffee). Hearing locals speaking in the Bosnian language helped me to differentiate locals from tourists who were mostly speaking English, German, Italian or Japanese. While communicating with locals, I initiated conversations, greeting them in the Bosnian language. My beginner level of Bosnian acted as an icebreaker; then, as conversation developed, we continued speaking in English.
64
D. Interviewing
Interviewing is one of the most frequently used qualitative research methods (Goodman, 2001). Interviewing provides condensed data and in-depth understanding of the topic studied (Spradley, 1979). According to Whyte (1982), listening and expressing interest rather than merely talking are essential factors for an effective interview. The narrative interview technique puts the researcher in the position of facilitator of discussion without depicting the interviewer as hegemonic or as an imposer.
Interviews have been regarded as a useful method in research on public space, as they present the actual users' views. For instance, Low (2000) uses interviews and particularly first-person narratives in studying the cultural and political significance of public space in Costa Rica. Interviewing locals who were using two plazas in San Jose, the capital of Costa Rica, Low (2000) provided data to understand everyday plaza life. Similarly, Hernández-García (2013), in his study of the informal settlements of Bogotá, applied observation and semi-structured interviews as the main methods of data collection. Focusing on the relationship between people and public space in the settlements, Hernández-García (2013) depicted different actors involved in the production and transformation of community and city.
The interview method also has been used while studying divided cities similar to Mostar. For instance, the interview was used to explore how local residents responded to the post-apartheid urban reconstruction in Johannesburg (Beall, Crankshaw, & Parnell, 2002). Similarly, Halilovich (2013) applied the method in researching place, memory and identity construction in the Bosnian Diaspora.
This study collected narrative data through interviews about residents' lived experience, memories and views of Old Bridge. Narrative illustrates more than what happens, telling a more comprehensive story that include emotions, perceptions and individual opinions. Rather than
65
presenting a chronological overview, narrative inquiry provides the narrator's point of view. Furthermore, first-person narratives show how people define and experience public spaces and present the meaning of those places in their daily lives (Low, 2000). Considering that "Qualitative interviewing is appropriate when the purpose of the research is to unravel complicated relationships…" (Rubin & Rubin, 1995, p. 51) and the current study is focused on finding the extent to which global discourse is accepted by locals, interviews provided rich data for analysis.
My presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina from June 2010 to September 2011 allowed me to conduct pilot interviews in English using different questions from those this study examines. I did not use pilot interview data in my analysis because they were conducted before IRB approval. Pilot interviews helped me to get practice in interviewing and present insights while doing background research. For instance, a simple question like "Were you in Bosnia during the war?," which is designed to initiate a conversation, is easily turned into a dialogue. Locals usually narrated their experiences and views in a very detailed way, focusing on broader topics such as how they and their families survived the war; what changed in their lives following the war; their future hopes and expectations; and so on. During the pilot interviews, I noticed that most of the interviewees narrated their war experience without using ethnic labels. They rather used the word "enemy" to denote the warring groups. Yet, in one instance, an interviewee explained her reluctance to move back to the apartment she was living prior to the war, using an ethnic label as: "In one night our neighbors turned into Chetniks (the word used to describe Serbian nationalists)." This was the only time that an interviewee used an ethnic label while talking about the war. Although there are sensitive topics that locals still avoid even mentioning,
66
such as war crimes against women, the pilot interviews revealed that most of the locals are eager to talk and share their experiences once they develop a trust with the interviewer.
1. Recruiting Interviewees
In order to build trust and rapport with the participants, I recruited initial interviewees through my local contacts in two community organizations, Nansen Dialogue Center (NDC Mostar) and Helping Hands and Hearts Foundation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. NDC Mostar is financed by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in cooperation with Nansen Academy in Lillehammer, Norway. NDC Mostar aims to create dialogue and cooperation among the Mostar residents regardless of their sex, religion, ethnicity, or nationality. The Helping Hands and Hearts Foundation is another organization based in Sarajevo for which I have volunteered since my arrival in Sarajevo in June 2010. The foundation is an inclusive and non-discriminatory organization that conducts educational and health projects for Bosnian citizens, and my volunteer work facilitated meeting and communicating with locals from various cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds. Although the foundation is based in Sarajevo, its projects cover a broader region, including Mostar.To find key informants, the aforementioned organizations were particularly chosen because they are non-political and inclusive of all groups living in Mostar. Considering that these organizations outreach to residents regardless of their ethnicity and religion, this study did not take groups as bounded and social organizations defined a priori.
For the purposes of this study, I define "local resident" as an individual who has been living in the city of Mostar both before and after the Bosnian War. My definition also includes individuals who have left Mostar seeking security during the Bosnian War, and returning after the war. This definition will lead us to residents who are able to talk about and compare pre-war Mostar and contemporary Mostar. Their views will provide a notably rich understanding of how
67
locals use and experience the Old Bridge differently at different periods, thus indexing the unique sociohistorical circumstances in which voices surface and also reconstruct such realities.
During the two-week-long interview period starting the last week of June 2012, I performed 38 unstructured and in-depth interviews with Mostar residents (see appendix G for the list of interviewees). Of my 38 interviews with Mostar residents, 11 were Croats and 27 were Bosniaks. That Bosniaks outweighed Croat participants reflects the nature of user population in and around Old Bridge. As it will be discussed in detail in the findings section, the Old Bridge area is mostly used by Bosniaks and tourists.
Initially, I utilized my local organizational contacts to find participants for my research. Nansen Dialogue Center invited me to an informal event where both Croat and Bosniak students use the organization’s premises for their meetings. Attending this meeting eased my entry into the community. There, I met university students who accepted my invitation to an interview and set the schedules for the following interviews. The participants I met there also referred me to their friends and relatives whom I could interview.
In order to avoid the appearance of coercion, local contacts did not ask any residents to participate in the study nor were they present when I requested participation or during interviews. The purpose of contacting them was for initial introductions to reach Mostar residents and to facilitate my entrance into this community. After initial introductions in community through attending meetings or charity events, I explained my research and requested, on my own, to conduct interviews.
I used a two-tiered approach to recruit interviewees. In addition to finding interviewees through local organizations,I generally approached those crossing Old Bridge or sitting at the cafes around Old Bridge to recruit more resident interviewees. At the cafes, people mostly
68
associated in groups. I generally requested to interview someone who was not in conversation with another person. I adopted this approach because I did not want to unintentionally interrupt a conversation. I also visited souvenir shops on Old Bridge to recruit participants. I generally paid early visits to those shops because both owners and sale assistants would be a lot busier later on when tourist customers arrived.
After initial greetings, I would introduce myself, and offer my university-issued business card. Then I would talk about my research, and request if the person was interested in taking part in an interview. About seventy percent of the time an interview was granted and thirty percent of the time it was declined. Following the participant`s signing the consent document, I would begin the interview (see Appendix H for Interview Guides). Occasionally participants would approach me to find out why I was sitting in a cafe and talking with different people, and after I discussed my research, they would agree to an interview. I asked the participants how much time they had and we set the interview time based on their availability. Sometimes a participant would suggest scheduling an interview on another day, and we would decide a place and time to meet. A few times, participants would schedule the interview according to prayer times on the grounds that they wanted to allocate more time to discuss the interview questions. Once, an interview was interrupted when the participant heard the call for prayer from a mosque. At that time, we were interviewing outside his stand where he sells paintings. His stand was across the Mosque so we could hear the Imam’s call for prayer from the mosque’s minaret. He quickly covered his paintings and ran to the mosque saying that we would continue after prayer. Our interview resumed after his return from the Mosque.
Mostar residents were also selected to participate in unstructured interviews from among those eligible persons I met through my local contacts and who I met at the research site.
69
Interviewees were sampled through a snowball method and limited to locals living in Mostar both before the Bosnian War and afterwards. Participants who left Mostar during the war for the sake of their security and returned after the war were also interviewed in order to understand how they felt when the Old Bridge was demolished while they were away. Anyone fitting the study’s eligibility criteria and who was willing to participate in an unstructured interview was recruited. Subjects were asked to tell their relatives, friends, and colleagues about the study and share my contact information should one of them wish to participate in either type of interview.
2. Language Issues
According to Spradley (1979), "Language not only functions as a means of communication, it also functions to create and express a cultural reality" (p. 20). Following the disintegration of Yugoslavia, language was used as a politicaltool to maintain a new state identity. Despite minimal differences between languages of the region, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia claim their separate languages, whereas Serbs and Bosnian Serbs adopted the Cyrillic alphabet. Bosnia and Herzegovina have three official languages: Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian. Those languages belong to the south Slavic language group but are spoken with different dialects.
Considering the increasing power attached to language in Bosnia-Herzegovina, my initial plan was to work with a Croatian interpreter to interview Croat participants, and a Bosniak interpreter to guide me in interviewing Bosniak participants. Considering time and budget issues, it would not be practical for me to hire two interpreters. Furthermore, interpreters bring their own assumptions and views to the interview and research process. I wanted to avoid the risk of "triple subjectivity" (interactions among the researcher, participant, and interpreter). Participants would
70
be more comfortable talking alone with the researcher in a post-war country, considering the sensitivities in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
It would have been ideal to conduct entire interviews in the Bosnian language, but, considering my beginner level knowledge of Bosnian, following the initial greetings and introductory remarks in Bosnian, I would feel more comfortable speaking in English. Although using the primary language of the participants is suggested for ethnographic studies, using a second language is acceptable when the researcher does not know the local language and/or when studying cultures that are speaking different languages (Muecke, 1994). Thus, I decided to conduct interviews in English. Interviewing in English has been practical as my interviewees were fluent in English. There were many factors that helped with the competency in English, including interviewees' age and level of education, their abroad experiences during war time and Mostar`s location in the heart of Europe. Apart from a few occasions, I did not encounter any problems in communication due to a language barrier. Occasionally, there were moments when interviewees could not find the right word to explain their views. Then, they stopped to think to find the right word, used examples to tell what they meant or sometimes asked my help with, "how do you say this?"
3. Consent/Confidentiality
Before the interviews, I obtained written consent from all participants. I received informed consent at the beginning of all interviews, after I explained the project. I read the consent document with every subject, discussing the benefits and risks of the study, and answering any and all of their questions. I fully informed all subjects that their participation was voluntary, that they can terminate the interview, without penalty, at any time, and that they are not required to answer any questions that may make them uncomfortable. In line with the
71
university procedures, the consent document was written in simple English. Upon their signing the document, the interview would begin.Signed consent documents are kept in a locked file cabinet to which only I have the key.
Getting informed consent is a necessary university procedure to ensure that participants are fully aware of the research and their rights as part of the study. Yet there were occasionally cases where the potential participants declined to interview after learning the requirement for a signature. In those cases, I simply thanked the individual and we parted ways.
Once I encountered an unusual incident with regard to informed consent. One of the souvenir shop owners on Old Bridge initially accepted the invitation to interview, so we set a date. Before the interview, we spoke a couple of times, so he was familiar with my presence and research topic. When we met for the interview, upon reading the consent document he did not want to sign the document after learning that I was a graduate student at an American university. He got nervous and asked whether I worked for the U.S. government. I showed him my university ID card, but he did not believe me. He told me that he accepted the invitation to interview only because I am from Turkey. I reasserted that I am a Turkish citizen who studies in the United States. Then he told me that he would do the interview on the condition that he would sign the document, not with his real name, but with a false one. I felt uncomfortable after this unethical proposal. I declined his proposal, thanked for his time, and left the shop.
Participants' identities remain confidential in this research. I created a pseudonym for each participant. All subjects were referred to in notes and in the study findings by pseudonyms. I also created pseudonyms for the public places where interviews took place in order to further enhance privacy and confidentiality. I did not create pseudonyms for national organizations (i.e., Tourism Association of Bosnia and Herzegovina) and international organizations (i.e., OSCE
72
Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina). Yet I used vague terms (i.e., representative of the organization) to define them in my research to further protect their identities. I maintained a master list of names and pseudonyms in order to keep the data organized. This document was stored in a password protected computer file on my personal computer.
4. Interview Process
Each interview with locals began with questions probing the interviewee's subjective views and relations to the site and ended with general questions about the interviewee's background (age, birthplace, education level, profession, and so on). For instance, a question regarding one's first memory of seeing Old Bridge presented the individual's life history in relation to the bridge, while a question about the importance of the bridge in interviewee's daily life shed light on practicality of the bridge. These open-ended questions were used to encourage interviewees to define their experience and memory of the Old Bridge using their own words (for a list of typical interview questions, see Appendix H). Based upon interviewees' responses, follow-up questions probing their experiences and interpretations of the Old Bridge were administered.
Brubaker (2006), focusing on the views of residents living in Cluj, a town in Transylvania, demonstrated that residents (a Hungarian-speaking majority and a Romanian-speaking minority) do not act in a manner consistent with the nationalist claims of political authorities and elites. Rather than using groupist language such as "the Serbs" killed "the Bosnian Muslims," Brubaker (2006) suggests a more dynamic and relational analysis of group formation focusing on everyday experience. Consequently, this study avoided using groupist language and focused on individual narratives. Initially, I conducted six in-depth interviews with each of the two main groups (Bosniaks and Croats) living in Mostar. This should not be taken as
73
applying a groupist approach, but something required to avoid selection bias and overrepresentation of any group among the interviewees in the initial stage. This also helped me reach locals representing the diverse groups living in Mostar.
Interviews took place in public places such as cafes or restaurants around the Old Bridge. Occasionally, when they had a busy schedule, interviews took place at interviewees' workplaces. For instance, Isa, a Bosniak middle aged man, accepted an invitation to interview at his souvenir shop, since that was his busiest time of the year. Although our interview was regularly interrupted by tourist customers and lasted longer than originally planned, this experience provided me a glimpse of daily routine near the bridge. During the interview, Isa continually offered me drinks and treats such as Bosniak coffee, juice, walnuts and cookies. Each time I thanked for his offerings and hospitality, Isa told me that those were "God's offerings." He was referring to the Islamic concept of "being God's guest" which requires one to show respect and hospitality when an unexpected guest arrives at one's place.Depending on the subject's willingness to talk, each interview took approximately thirty (30) to sixty (60) minutes. No compensation was offered.
Data was collected to the point of saturation, as is the rule in qualitative studies. A researcher arrives at a saturation point where additional data does not produce new information capable of affecting the existing thematic categories (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lindlof & Taylor, 2002; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
In addition to interviews with Mostar residents, four unstructured interviews were performed with professionals. Interviews with professionals as representatives of international organizations, including Elvir Djuliman, Director of the Nansen Dialogue Center, and Aida Maric, Education Officer at the OSCE Mostar Office, generated understanding of global
74
representations of Old Bridge. I contacted non-local professionals by email to request an interview at their convenience. All interviews with non-local professionals were conducted in their offices. Professionals working at the OSCE Mostar Office requested the interview questions in advance so I emailed them a week before the interview. They replied that they would not be able to respond questions on the symbolic status of Old Bridge and living in a divided city on the grounds that OSCE Mostar Office's work is not directly related to Old Bridge. Knowing that it is not always easy to gain access to these individuals due to their busy schedule, I opted for conducting the interviews with the general questions on Mostar and their organizational works and projects, including educational projects on diversity and multiculturalism. Professional interviewees preferred to talk about their projects in Mostar aimed at developing multiculturalism. In contrast to locals' accounts focusing on problems of cultural differences, professionals mostly talked about projects designed to overcome the divide. For instance, they focused on the Building Bridges program initiated by the OSCE to bring different ethnic schools together for joint activities. Representatives of international organizations preferred to talk about their activities to connect both sides of Mostar and hesitated to talk about the physical structure of the bridge in an effort to respect the ongoing sensitivities in Mostar.
My initial plan was to record each interview with a digital audio recorder, but all of my intervieweesdeclined to be recorded. In order to record data I took written notes during each interview. At the end of each day in the field, I typed up all my field notes and stored them in a password protected computer file on my personal computer.
I recorded two types of field notes; one included observations and the other was related to self-reflection. Field notes of observations were different from taped data, including nonverbal communication, description of surroundings and other material factors, and any additional data.
75
Field notes of self-reflections enhanced the reflexive nature of the ethnographic study. I also kept a journal to record my feelings and experience in the field during and after the observations and interviews.
E. Data Analysis
Qualitative textual analysis techniques were applied to examine meaning by observing patterns within a text (Fairclough, 1995, 2000; van Dijk, 1997). For this analysis, I define text as "all spoken and written forms of language use (talk and text) as social practice" (Wood & Kroger, 2000, p. 19). The main goal is to depict "the systematic links between texts, discourse practices, and sociocultural practices" (Fairclough, 1995, p. 17).
Narrative inquiry focuses on the stories of the participants. The goal was to find commonalities and differences within the narratives of the respondents. Foss (1989) suggests focusing on the substance or content of the narrative; form of the narrative; or using both the substance and form of the narrative. My primary focus was on the content of the narrative. I also focused on implicit meaning in terms of content such as unspoken topics or silences, in addition to explicit meanings through the technique of overreading. Overreading requires paying attention to the unspoken words, silences, and repetitions in the interview text. My analysis was a close reading of individual narratives and thematic comparisons of diverse narratives. I read my hand-written notes on each participant's responses several times, then typed and saved them in password protected Word files.
After multiple readings,I analyzed narrative interviews through focusing on the main themes and topics I encountered. I further examined in depth how those themes were described by individuals. For instance, I looked at how locals describe what Old Bridge means to them, and in what context they talked about the bridge with their friends and families (for example, do they refer to the destruction of the bridge during the war when talking about the rebuilt bridge?). I
76
also paid attention to the sequencing of events while interviewees talked about the bridge. Sequence analysis will enable me to understand the important time periods in locals' lives as well as the sequential impact on their experience and interpretation of the bridge.
Interpretive research is usually an ongoing process that requires documenting, transcribing and analyzing data as quickly as possible, as they emerge, so that the description is "thick" (Geertz, 1973). As narratives do not speak themselves, the interpretation of the researcher was also used as an analytical tool in this study.
F. Limitations/Issues in the Field
As a Turkish national researcher from United States, I faced issues of access, prejudice and interpretation that are common in ethnographic studies conducted by outsider researchers. Being an outsider carries the risk that the researcher may not understand the members of the group being studied (Merriman, Johnson-Bailey, Lee, Kee, Ntseane, & Muhamad, 2001). Nevertheless, this also makes it easier to ask questions that might not be asked by insiders. The dynamic interplay between local residents as interviewees and an outside interviewer should be carefully analyzed, as these are themselves rich narrative data.
Being an outsider also presents problems such as suffering from culture shock and failure to understand cultural norms. Considering my living experience in Sarajevo since May 2010 and attending the Bosnian language course at the International House in Sarajevo, any effects of initial cultural shock were alleviated. Being the spouse of a diplomat who is regularly appointed to different countries, as well as my prior exchange student experience in the United States as a Fulbright student, also facilitated a smooth adjustment to living in Bosnia Herzegovina.
The presence of Turkish words in the Bosnian language and still-used Ottoman era customs and traditions have helped me understand the cultural norms of Bosnian daily life. Being a researcher from Turkey eased my entry into the Bosniak community, considering the
77
special status of Turks in the eyes of Bosniaks. Before and during the interviews, many Bosniak participants shared their positive thoughts about Turkey, Turks and Muslims in general. Usually, I felt that my identity as a Turk was more visible than my researcher identity. This has been an advantage in building rapport with Bosniak participants and enabling them to talk to me with ease.
Although being a Turkish national usually proved advantageous in the field, occasionally it led to difficulties in approaching and communicating with some individuals, as each Bosnian citizen has a different interpretation of Ottoman-era Bosnia, and some might be biased against Turks. For instance, there were two cases in which my interview requests were cancelled after my nationality was disclosed, despite the participants having initially shared their interest in my research.
My gender played a positive role in this study, easing my entry into the community as well as facilitating requests for interviews. As a female researcher, both male and female participants appeared to find me less threatening to talk to.
Living and doing research in a post-war country might prove traumatic. Considering my prior living experience in Tajikistan, which is also a post-war country, and volunteering there for Refugee Children and Vulnerable Citizens (RCVC), a local non-governmental organization working on behalf of Afghan refugees, doing research in Bosnia and Herzegovina was not easier but has been more manageable compared to the experiences of a researcher with no post-war country experience.
78
IV. THEMATIC ANALYSIS-PUBLIC SPACE
This chapter examines political and cultural significance of Old Bridge as public space by focusing on the first-person narratives of Mostar residents. Residents’ narrations of memories, legends, images and daily use of Old Bridge show us the social construction of public space and how it was contested for political, economic and ethnic reasons. As locals narrate Old Bridge, they also define—against other residents' alternative ethnic, political, and cultural inclinations on the one hand, and constructions by governmental and international organizations on the other—their identities and worldviews. Diverse, if not opposing, views on Old Bridge highlight the dialogical character of these narratives. Eventually, local conflicts over public space point to larger ethnic and cultural issues in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These narratives allowed me to trace both past and contemporary conflicts over use; experience and meanings of Old Bridge; and to read and decode the ongoing negotiation of multi-layered meanings assigned by different levels of agencies. In this chapter, I explore everyday practices of locals in Old Bridge that deal with the issues of inclusion, exclusion and attachment to public space. As a living public space, Old Bridge has a deep, bitter past yet also symbolizes hope for a peaceful future.
A. Living in/with the Old Bridge: Portraits of Typical Days
I start this chapter with excerpts from my field notes to describe typical days in the field over different seasonal periods. These are the scenes/situations, day to day, in which locals find themselves and negotiate their presence vis-a-vis tourists.
1. Old Bridge in the summer
It was around noon one Friday in June 2011, when I started my observations on Old Bridge. There were hundreds of tourists in small and large groups walking across the bridge. Large groups are easily recognized as the tourist guides carry a flag denoting the nationality of
79
the group. On that day, I observed the flags of Japan, Italy, Germany and Turkey. Large group of tourists followed their tourist guides, stopping at the front of the bridge to listen to the history of the bridge and then resuming their crossings which were usually interrupted so they could take photos. Small groups acted more freely, enjoying their every step crossing Old Bridge. Although crossing Old Bridge does not take long for locals, tourists spend approximately twenty minutes to take the photo of Old Bridge and the beautiful turquoise Neretva River from every possible angle.
As the number of tourists increased on Old Bridge around 1:00 p.m., a diver with his swimsuit on, came and stood in the middle of Old Bridge. The diver, a dark skinny man in his mid-twenties, asked for money shouting, “Euros for jumping,” from the tourists. While some tourists were giving money to the diver, some were looking for a nice spot to photograph the diver’s jump. Collecting money took around five minutes; meanwhile, the number of people waiting for the jump had increased. Then, the diver stood on the Old Bridge and jumped into the cold deep waters of Neretva River. As he jumped, all I heard were the amazed voices of tourists shouting "wow!", clapping, and the clicking sounds of their cameras. Tourists took a couple of more photos of the Old Bridge and its surroundings, and then continued strolling in and around Old Bridge. Taking photos of Old Bridge, enjoying its views from cafes and restaurants, and shopping for souvenirs seemed to be the primary activities for tourists.
On the west side of Old Bridge, there are souvenir shops, an ice cream stand and cafes. There were a couple of tourists lined in front of the ice cream stand; some rested under the shade of an umbrella on the wooden tables at the cafes, drinking lemonade to seek refuge from the 34 C weather. On the east side of Old Bridge, there are the Old Bridge Museum; artists selling their paintings of Old Bridge; and more souvenir shops.
80
I also crossed Old Bridge, looking at Old Bridge postcards while walking by the souvenir shops. When I crossed back to the west side of the bridge, I saw the diver who had just jumped. He was still in his swimsuit standing at the stairs of the Divers' Club (see Appendix I for the photograph of Mostar Diving Club) next to a tiny stone with "Don't Forget, 93" written on it as a reminder of the date that Old Bridge was demolished during the Bosnian War (see Appendix J for the photograph of the sign). The diver was awaiting the arrival of more tourist groups. This was a normal summer day on the bridge.
2. Old Bridge in the winter
Contrary to vivid, colorful and crowded summer days, Old Bridge area is completely different in other seasons. Below is a description of my observations of Old Bridge on a rainy day in February 2012 as I wrote in my field journal.
A weekday in Mostar, it was raining as I walked towards Old Bridge from my motel. Everything looked different from the summertime. There were no tourist groups around. Neither did I see the postcard stands in front of the souvenir shops. Nor were are standing salesmen waiting for customers. I was the only one walking on the narrow road heading to the bridge. Then a wet street cat appeared looking for refuge from the rain. As the kitten hid under the trash bin located in front of the carpet shop, I stopped to listen to my surroundings. I could not hear anything but the rain drops. Old Town seemed completely deserted. For a couple of minutes, I felt sorrow and isolated.
But then I arrived at the Old Bridge. It stood with all its magnificent beauty. And it all belonged to me. I walked on it very slowly as I was afraid of crossing it fast. I wanted to enjoy every second of being on the bridge. When I reached the middle, the point where the divers jump in the summer, I stopped and touched its stones. Closing my eyes, I tried to think about how the
81
architect Mimar Hayruddin felt when he finished Old Bridge. Then I sadly remembered the bridge that I was walking on was not the same bridge that Mimar Hayruddin built. I heard that some original stones from Old Bridge were used in the reconstruction. Could the stone that I just touched be the original? Or the one just across on the other side of the bridge? Who could tell?
Standing in the middle of the bridge, I looked at the views from all angles. When you look at the north side, you see the colorfully painted row of houses in Old Town as well as the minaret of Koski Mehmet Pasha Mosque. On the west side, there is Halebija Tower where Mostar Divers Club is located. The stairs to this Club were lively in the summer where divers hang out together. But now there was no one. It seemed isolated. On the east, Tara Tower stands where the Museum of Old Bridge is located. On the south side, I saw empty rocks on the Neretva River which were used by children for sunbathing during the summer.
While I was thinking about summer days on Old Bridge, the rain started to pour heavily. I crossed the bridge quickly, hoping the café just steps away from the bridge would be open. I was relieved when I saw the "we are open" sign in front of the door. I had sat in the garden of this café several times last summer. But this was my first time at indoors. I came in and sat at one of the few tables. Besides me, there was only one waiter inside. I greeted the waiter and ordered Bosanski Coffee. Just to chat, I said, "No tourists around today?" The waiter just nodded his head. I felt that the waiter was not in the mood for talking today.
As I drank my coffee I wrote my field notes. I sat in the café until the rain stopped. On my way back to the motel, from far away I see a tourist couple taking photos of Old Bridge. Before I arrived at the Old Bridge, they left the bridge and entered the art gallery. Old Bridge still seemed lonely but beautiful, as if in a scene in a fairy tale.
82
B. Experience of Public Space
Social theorists emphasize the importance of everyday activities and social relations in negotiating culture (de Certau, 1984; Foucault, 1984; Lefebvre, 1997). de Certau (1984), in his influential work, The Practice of Everyday Life, focuses on the mundane tasks, everyday activities that individuals practice repeatedly yet unconsciously. de Certau (1984) argues that examination of these mundane practices does not imply a return to individuality, but rather presents a multifaceted view of society. Lefebvre (1997) suggests a tri-layered space—in his words, "a conceptual triad"—to depict the many and complicated interconnections that occur in space. Introducing layers of space as representations of space, spatial practice, and representational spaces, Lefebvre (1997) describes the presence of the conceived, the perceived, and the lived space.Lefebvre's spatial triad provides a useful vintage point to understand Old Bridge in Mostar as a multi-layered space that is always changing.
Lefebvre's representations of spacedescribes the space conceived by the rulers, authorities, urban planners and architects, space which is therefore objective. Initially, the Old Bridge was designed and built by Architect Hayreddin in 1566 following Mostar's becoming an administrative center of the region under Ottoman rule. The goal was to engineer the urban transformation of Mostar from a medieval settlement to an important Ottoman-style town (Pašić, 2006, p. 7). During the Bosnian War, the bridge was utilized as a gateway to transfer arms, ammunition, food and health supplies. Following the destruction of Old Bridge, a temporary bridge was built by the residents to transfer basic supplies (such as water and food) required during the siege of town.
In the post-war period, the Bridge was reconstructed and recognized as a national monument of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2004 and as a World Heritage site by UNESCO in 2005. Inclusion of Old Bridge on the UNESCO World Heritage List is mentioned in all official
83
tourism and promotional documents, as both local authorities and international organizations have consistently underlined the multicultural aspects of space to maintain stability and dialogue within post-conflict Mostar, as well as to create a new image for the city in order to attract tourists and foreign investment. According to UNESCO (2010), World Heritage Sites belong to all of humanity, "irrespective of the territory on which they are located."
It would be useful, first, to see how the UNESCO World Heritage list is constituted. To be included in this list, sites must be of outstanding universal value and meet at least one out of ten selection criteria:
(i) to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius;
(ii) to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design;
(iii) to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a
civilization which is living or which has disappeared;
(iv) to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological
ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;
(v) to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change;
(vi) to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria);
(vii) to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;
(viii) to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;
(ix) to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals;
84
(x) to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation. (UNESCO, 2010)
As noted by UNESCO's Report on the Joint UNESCO/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to the Old Bridge Area of the Old City of Mostar (2008)8, the Old Bridge Area of the Old City of Mostar was placed on the World Heritage List for meeting criterion vi:
With the "renaissance" of the Old Bridge and its surroundings, the symbolic power and meaning of the City of Mostar—as an exceptional and universal symbol of coexistence of communities from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds—has been reinforced and strengthened, underlining the unlimited efforts of human solidarity for peace and powerful co-operation in the face of overwhelming catastrophes.
In the selection criteria, Old Bridge is portrayed as a symbol of coexistence of diverse communities. The symbolic status of Old Bridge is once again highlighted in the UNESCO documents: "The elements that reflect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property are present in situ, including the intangible ones (especially its symbolic power)" (UNESCO, 2010). Similarly, tourism brochures and museum displays also focus on Old Bridge's symbolic and connecting status of diverse communities. Obviously, the Old Bridge and the City of Mostar were conceived by the authorities as sites for multicultural coexistence, solidarity, and cooperation, with efforts to overcome catastrophes.
8 http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/100757
85
The second layer is spatial practice, whichindicates the perceived space as defined by the rules and norms of behavior imposed in that particular place. In a sense, spatial practice denotes sociopolitical characteristics emphasizing social relations within the society. Throughout the Bosnian War, the city of Mostar had been a world of others, a world populated by residents who belonged to different ethnic and religious groups. In Mostar, the boundary between self and other had been the rule, where a Croat defined a Bosnian as other, and vice versa. Accordingly, Old Bridge was perceived as a space that became the locus of a world of others. During the war, Croats viewed the bridge as a symbol of the dominance of Bosnian Muslims, since the bridge was built during the Ottoman period (Grodach, 2002). Therefore, the presence of Old Bridge unconsciously reproduced the power relations of the past in the minds of Croats.
During the war, Old Bridge was transformed from a mental battleground into a physical battleground. In the end, space became a center of military conflict partly due to what it means for a specific group of people and what it represents for different groups of people. In post-war Mostar, following its addition to the UNESCO Heritage list, Old Bridge was transformed into a commodity space. Accordingly, it turned from the bridge dividing the Croatian side from the Bosnian side into a bridge connecting both sides. Cultural competition was left aside while economic challenges impelled local authorities to redefine the public space.
Lefebvre's third layer is representational spaces, which denote the lived space, in other words, how users symbolically and materially shape the space conceived and designed by the authorities—it is therefore always subjective.Understanding the cultural importance of Old Bridge requires one to observe everyday activities on the bridge. Observations and interviews with Mostar residents allowed me to explore how local people experience Old Bridge as a space
86
in their daily lives. Their divergent accounts on the importance of Old Bridge in their daily lives can be seen as realizing Lefebvre’s conception of the lived space.
Looking at the experience of "being on the bridge" reveals how Old Bridge is narrated differently and dialogically as each individual shares her or his own memory and experience of place, whether it concerns daily routine (i.e., crossing the bridge to go to work from home) or part of ceremonial ritual (i.e., a traditional jump from the bridge).
For many, Old Bridge stands as a workplace, as it has become a part of a daily routine for many residents who use it to cross from one side to the other, or as a shortcut. Lejla, a Bosniak who lives on the east side, says, "I am here on the Old Bridge every day to sell my jewelry designs. It is kind of my workplace." Similarly, Azra, a Bosniak who works in a souvenir shop on the bridge, says she crosses the bridge every day. But for others, Old Bridge means more than a workplace; as Isa, a Bosniak shop owner, says "My shop is on the bridge. But the bridge is not only a job for me. Bridge is our love. Bridge is 'one way of communication'." In the field, I observed that when locals (mostly Bosniaks) are crossing the bridge they usually come across with an acquaintance, then stop and communicate. Naturally, Old Bridge allows communication among residents who daily use Old Bridge.
Social uses of public space include public and private gatherings, as well as leisure and recreational activities. Social uses of Old Bridge change significantly depending on the age, ethnicity and employment status of the residents. There is a certain degree of conflict between regular users like shop owners and other residents (this will be discussed further in the globalization section).
Most of the residents come to the bridge regularly to meet with friends, to have coffee together, or to shop. Faris, a Bosniak student in his early twenties, says, "I go there to meet with
87
friends. Also, it is a quick way to reach somewhere." Likewise, Alija, a Bosniak student, mentions that he crosses the bridge on his way back home from work. Damir, a Bosniak soldier, says that he usually meets with friends on Old Bridge to have coffee. Ajla, a Bosniak student, says, "I live close by the bridge and I cross it every day. I also like having coffee in one of the cafes under the bridge."
Residents like Alma, a Bosniak from the eastern side, emphasize the touristic significance of the bridge, saying, "Now Old Bridge is more important for tourists. For us, it is only a bridge that we have to cross every day. It is part of our daily routine."
Despite the fact that Bosniaks tend to use bridge as part of a daily routine, most Croats tend to avoid Old Bridge unless they have a reason, such as shopping or playing host to a foreign visitor. Croat interviewees mentioned many reasons to avoid the bridge but mainly said it is because it is crowded with tourists, as well as an out of the way route for them. Croat residents who live on the western side and far away from the bridge do not often visit Old Bridge unless they have visitors in town. Jasna, a Croat university student, told me that "I do not go there often. But I went there 2 weeks ago because I have a friend visiting Mostar from Canada." Dragana, a Croat who studies journalism, said that she took a friend from Italy to one of the restaurants on Old Bridge. Dragana adds that "I go there once or twice a month because I live at the other side and it is far away for me." Marija, a Croat student from the western side, mentions that she comes to the bridge to buy jewelry when she has friends visiting the town. Marija also says that she comes to take pictures on Old Bridge to share the beauty of this splendid architecture. Some residents find the Old Bridge area expensive and thus avoid going there, particularly during the summer. Kresimir, a Croat student in his early 20s, says, "Last week, my friend from Banja Luka visited so I took him but I do not really visit old bridge. Because it's far away from western side.
88
Also, it is the most expensive part of the city. Prices go up there. And in winter, there is nothing to do there. In the summer there are disco clubs."
As distance and crowds of tourists dissuade use of the Bridge, there are residents who prefer going to the bridge in the winter season when there are fewer tourists. Ivan, a Croat living on the west side of Mostar, notes, "I was there three days ago. I sat in one of the cafes under the bridge. Mostly, I prefer going there in the winter. During the winter, there are less tourists so at that time Old Bridge only belongs to me."
Often Croat interviewees were reluctant to talk about Bosniak dominance around Old Bridge. Only one Croat interviewee, Sanja, a university student who is twenty-two years old, told me that she does not go to Old Bridge for ethnic reasons. "I do not go there often because on the eastern side shops are owned by Bosniaks. And I cannot find anything to buy belonging to my nationality and religion. On that side, Muslims own everything." It appears that almost all shops around Old Bridge are owned by Bosniaks. Yet I observed that shops around Old Bridge sell a wide variety of products designed for customers of different faiths. For instance, there are shops selling Muslim prayer beads and Christian cross pendants from the same stand.
Old Bridge has become a daily topic of conversation for Bosniak residents, particularly the ones who work there or whose friends and relatives work at the bridge. As Ajla, a Bosniak student, says, "My father is the owner of one of the souvenir shops on the bridge. So we talk about the bridge every day. We usually talk about business related topics such as the number of the tourists. And my grandmother lives near the bridge. We talk about what happened during the war. Also, I have diver friends. I talk with them on the bridge as well."
Despite their seemingly divergent uses of the Old Bridge, both Croat and Bosniak residents share similar nostalgic feelings about the past. Although in the post-war period Old
89
Bridge has turned into a public space used daily by Bosniaks and tourists, during the Ottoman and Yugoslav eras Old Bridge played an important role in everyday life for Mostar residents of all ethnicities. Such nostalgia can be discerned in the accounts of residents. Marko, a Croat student and political activist from western side, mentions "They *my family* recall how they meet with their friends on the bridge." Ana, a Croat, says, "My mom always says how they had fun in Mostar and old bridge with their friends no matter what their ethnicity." The memories highlight that there is less social interaction among ethnic groups on the bridge today, compared to Mostar’s past when Old Bridge stood as a meeting place for all residents. Lefebvre’s representational space of Old Bridge is still alive and full of emotion, as residents refer to their or family members’ childhood memories.
C. Spatial Boundaries
Lefebvre (1997) does not view the aforementioned three layers as separate parts of space, but rather emphasizes the interconnection among them. Otherwise, a member of a society could not move from one layer to another easily. Yet Lefebvre (1997) indicates that the layers do not always constitute a coherent space. My analysis showed that for Croat residents it is difficult to move from one layer to another, which takes us to the spatial boundaries of Old Bridge. When Old Bridge was demolished in the war, the common code between Mostar residents disappeared. Lack of a common code was quite visible in residents' accounts as they told of Old Bridge.
Lefebvre (1997) argues that it is possible to read a produced space as a text through decoding included messages, i.e., "a process of signification" in which "...members of a particular society...acting within that space" would be able to understand it (p. 17). Using the example of a typical Renaissance Era Western town with a focus on religious symbols and
90
figures, Lefebvre (1997) asserts that a coherent space requires "a common language, a consensus and a code" to be established within the society.
Instead, analysis of narratives of Mostar residents showed a lack of a common language on Old Bridge, which highlights the spatial boundary. As the two sides of Old Bridge are physically close yet culturally distant and economically different, there has existed a physical as well as social/mental border/wall. For many, Old Bridge stands as a visible spatial boundary in Mostar; the boundary has been widened to its periphery on the Boulevard (Bulevar Narodne Revolucije) separating Eastern from Western Mostar during the Bosnian War. Old Bridge, once a space of opposition and even military conflict, still stands as a spatial boundary and reflects the current conflicts within the city, whether they are in cultural, economic, and or political in character.
People of different ages and ethnic groups define the public space of Old Bridge and contest its meaning and importance differently, through the spatial boundary implicitly or explicitly engraved between diverse ethnic groups. In the words of Marko, the student political activist, "In Mostar, certain populations do not want to cross to the other side. They do not see any need to cross the invisible border. There are some Croat kids that they have never been to the Old Bridge."
Despite the claims of international organizations that Old Bridge connects different ethnic groups, most of the residents disputed this, due to the Bosniak majority in and around the Old Bridge area. For instance, Azra, a Bosniak sale assistant, said, "In reality, it does not connect the people from different sides because the majority of the people, like shop owners, workers and the people who usually hang out here, are Bosniaks." This statement also explains why Bosniaks outnumbered Croat interviewees in my research, as I found informants around Old Bridge area.
91
Similarly, Ana, a Croat student from the eastern side, emphasizes that Old Bridge connects Mostar only geographically. According to Ana, "It connects the two banks of the river. Older people do not see it as a bridge connecting because they recall the division during the war. I do not have a separate city in my mind. But the accent is on it. Everybody reminds me that I am living in a divided city."
Others, however, emphasize the geographical and natural character of Old Bridge. Damir, a Bosniak soldier, says, "The Old Bridge connects both sides of the river no matter who lives there." But even the residents who believe that Old Bridge connects the city emphasize the fact that this is not a mutual agreement among all residents. As Jasmina, a Bosniak sales assistant, notes, "Yes, the bridge connects. But at the same time, I do know that there are some young Croats who have never been to the Old Bridge. I heard a Croat saying that she does not even know where the Old Bridge is." Lamija, a Bosniak radio programmer from the Eastern side, explains the reluctance of Croat to visit Old Bridge by reference to historical facts. She told me, "People from the other side, many of them do not come here. It symbolizes the Ottoman Empire and the pre-war period of Mostar." The reluctance of Croats to use Old Bridge indicates their difficulties in establishing connections with the Ottoman past of Old Bridge. Moreover, for many Croats, the Old Bridge reminds them of the bitter days of conflict and fighting during the Bosnian War.
Residents suspiciously question the claims of politicians and international organizations that Old Bridge connects ethnic groups. Ivan, defining himself as a Mostarian who comes from an interethnic family, refutes the claims about Old Bridge. In his words, "It's pathetic to believe that a bridge can really connect people. One building does not mean anything—politics and politicians give you different interpretations of the bridge. People could be more connected if
92
you built a factory and gave them jobs. The only way to connect people is through contact. The bridge could be a good start but with those current politicians it does not mean anything."
For older generations, viewing Old Bridge as a means of connecting is more difficult due to the still fresh memories of the Bosnian War. As Mislav, a Croat university student who has lived on both sides of Mostar, puts it, "My dad always says: 'I have lost lots of important things other than the bridge during the war.' I do not think that the bridge connects people. How can a bridge connect? Before the war, people were living together. Old people still remember what happened during the war. It will take generations to live together again."
Marko, a Croat student and political activist, spoke about the legacy arguments on Old Bridge: "Now the big issue is who owns the bridge and who owns the legacy. Bosniaks condemn Croats for destroying the old bridge."
Hamza, a Bosniak artist who earns his living through painting and selling Old Bridge postcards, claims that Old Bridge was destroyed by Croats because it was built by Muslims. Hamza adds, "The main reason is that it is the symbol of Muslims. Later they said it was demolished for strategic reasons. But that is not true. We witnessed an animosity against Muslims since they also demolished the mosques." He asks, "Were our mosques also strategic?" During the interview Hamza assured me that he neither accuses all Croats nor hates them. Referring to the Hague Court trials, Hamza says, "When I say Croats demolished the bridge, I do not accuse all Croats. General Praljak ordered and recorded it." Likewise, many interviewees (both Croats and Bosniaks) avoid blaming Croats for the destruction of Old Bridge. More specifically, while Croats just avoided talking about this issue, Bosniaks usually defined those culpable as "they" or "enemy."
93
Such accounts, however, were refuted by a few Croats. Marko challenges the claims that Croats destroyed the bridge. According to Marko, "Old Bridge was destroyed by the people who are from outside of Mostar. Those people were living in small villages outside of Mostar and did not know the importance of Old Bridge for Mostar city." He refutes the argument that ancient hatreds played a crucial role in Bosnian War. For him, it was fighting between people living in the city and outsiders. Indeed, some commentators (Donia & Fine, 1994; Grodach, 2002) refer to the dichotomy between peasants and urbanites and its role in the Bosnian War, since peasants were more inclined to join ethnic militias. This interpretation is voiced primarily by Bosnian citizens who support a multiethnic and multi-religious country. Instead of interpreting the Bosnian War as between different ethnic groups, they argue that the fighting occurred between developed and underdeveloped groups, or between urban and rural groups. Regardless of what caused the conflict, in residents' narratives Mostar is not a city of multi-ethnic harmonious coexistence. Especially for some Croat residents, their lived space does not stand in line with the conceived space nor the perceived space of Old Bridge.
The planning and construction of Old Bridge when Mostar was a part of the Ottoman Empire created a perception that it belongs to the Ottoman Empire, and thus reflects Muslim or Bosniak culture. Yet there are claims that the design of Old Bridge resembles a Venetian Bridge, so can be said to be part of Roman culture. Also, there are arguments that there was another bridge at the very same place even long time before Old Bridge was built. For instance, Popovac (2006) refers to the presence of "a medieval wooden suspension bridge which was [of] very unstable and fragile construction" (p. 50). Furthermore, archaeological studies in 2003 have found several masonry structures on the Neretva River, perhaps revealing the existence of two bridges before Old Bridge at the very same place (Popovac, 2006). These ongoing discussions of
94
architectural design and nostalgia indicate local struggles for political, economic and social control of Old Bridge as a public space. Such controversial claims depict the scale of struggle over the symbolic meaning of Old Bridge. Lefebvre assumes an objective representation of space which is conceived by urban planners and architects. Yet controversial claims on the architectural design of Old Bridge show that, even the representation of Old Bridge changes in line with an individual's subjective interpretation of history.
In line with Bourdieu's (1977) assertion that the design of public space often reproduces the power relations of the past, Old Bridge reminds most of the Mostar residents of the Ottoman period, since the bridge was built then. Considering the fact that each ethnic group in Mostar has its own distinctive, if not opposing, view of the Ottoman era and its legacy, interpretation of Old Bridge varies dramatically. Spatial division of Mostar has been confirmed by most of the residents (both Bosniaks and Croats) that I spoke with. Croats have difficulty identifying themselves with Ottoman history which makes their attachment to the Old Bridge more taxing. On the other hand, Bosniaks, remembering the Ottoman era in principally positive terms, prefer to view Old Bridge as a part of their culture.
Edib, a Bosniak tour guide, views Old Bridge as a symbol of Bosniak culture and likens its demolition as an attempt to destroy Bosniak culture. Edib adds, "It is the same as killing Bosniaks." Adin, the Bosniak shop owner, claims, "For the Croats the bridge only symbolizes Turks and Muslims." As Isa, the Bosniak souvenir shop owner on Old Bridge, emphasizes, "Old Bridge was built by the Ottomans for Bosniaks." Isa adds, "During the war, all of our architecture demolished including the bridge, hammams, mosques and houses. Symbols of our culture are seen as a problem that could be solved." Referring to claims that Old Bridge is a Roman Bridge, Isa shows me an old postcard dating from the Austrian era which has a picture of
95
Old Bridge with "Roman Bridge" written on the back. Furious, Isa says: "The bridge is so beautiful that they claim that it cannot be Turkish."
Josip, a Croat priest, also claims that Old Bridge is Roman architecture but has a different interpretation.He says, "At first, before the Old Bridge, my people, Christians, were here. Old Bridge is Roman architecture and Ottomans made the Christian slaves build the bridge." There was not slavery in the Ottoman Empire, yet Josip`s account reflects a criticism and anger to the dominant position of Muslims during Ottoman era as they paid lower taxes and gained higher positions in local administration compared to other religious groups (Donia & Fine, 1994).
Although legacy and ownership arguments deepen the spatial boundaries between Mostar residents, some residents voice unifying claims. As Sanja, a Croat university student in her early twenties, asserts, "Old Bridge is mostly on the Bosniak part. Therefore, Bosniaks think that it belongs to them. But it belongs to both sides. Old Bridge belongs to all of us. It is of Mostarians." Similarly, Alma, a Bosniak, says, “Ottoman people built this bridge for all Mostarians not only for the Muslims." Amar, a Bosniak tourist guide, also says that "Old Bridge connects both sides. Croats have the same feelings as we Bosniaks do. They also used to swim in this river."
D. Place Attachment
Place attachment can develop at the individual level or the group level; it stems from the history of a group in a specific place and their experience and social relations in that place (Carr et al., 1992). Bitter and fresh memories of the demolition of Old Bridge during the Bosnian War leads to further bonding of Mostar residents with Old Bridge. Most interviewees, young and old, were almost crying when they told of the demolition of Old Bridge during the war. Those of older generations often shared their memories of being on the bridge for the first time, thus imparting their first memories to younger people. Such first-person narratives express place
96
attachment and highlight how residents make sense of, and assign meaning to, the loss of Old Bridge.
Jasmina, a Bosniak sales assistant, very clearly recalls the day Old Bridge was destroyed:
I was eight years old then. We were living two kilometers away from the bridge and on that day my father went down the city to find us some chocolate, which was so difficult during the war. I was so happy when he came back with the chocolates. But my father started to cry when he sat down. He told my mom, "They destroyed our bridge." And then my mom also started to cry. They were really connected to the bridge.
Similarly, Ivan, who belongs to an interethnic family with a Croat father and Bosniak mother, said, "I was nine years old when the bridge was demolished. I cried. I remember the day it was demolished because it was like a family member died. There was a mourning atmosphere in our house."
Ajla, a Bosniak student in her early twenties, told of her attachment, describing the bridge as a part of her. Ajla adds that she felt "empty" after the destruction of the bridge. Still experiencing difficulties understanding the destruction, Ajla asks, "How could somebody do this to us?" Likewise, Amar, a tourist guide from the eastern side, recalls, "When the bridge was destroyed people could not believe that it could happen." Alma, a Bosniak sale assistant, is still frustrated and cannot understand the logic of the decision by the "other side's Army" to destroy the bridge. Alma asserts that she does not understand "how it helped them during the war because there are lots of bridges in Mostar but they chose this one to crush." Sad due to a perplexed feeling of something having been taken away, residents deepened their sense of
97
attachment and connection. Indeed, it is not until a tie is severed that people realize how strong the tie could have been, if only retroactively.
Aside from those who personally witnessed the event, young generations of Mostar residents have also learned place attachment through the memories and stories told by their families. For instance, Damir, a Bosniak who was five years old during the war, says that his family told him how the bridge was demolished. Damir adds that he later watched a video of the destruction and felt so sad.
As older generations of Mostar residents have bonded to the Old Bridge themselves, their place attachment also has an emotional aspect. Nadija, a Bosniak university student who fled to France during the war remembers that her mother cried when the bridge was demolished. Nadija adds, "It was so important for my mom, because she lived all her life in Mostar. And she met my father on the bridge. My father jumped from the bridge to impress my mother. My mom always tells this story how my father jumped from the bridge just because of her."
Adin, a thirty-year-old Bosniak man who owns a carpet shop near Old Bridge, watched a television broadcast of the destruction of the bridge in Germany where he sought refuge during the war. Adin remembers, "I felt like I lost someone from my family, someone very close. Even today it is still very difficult. Look at my goosebumps." Adin became emotional and we had to halt our interview for couple of minutes. Then Adin talked about how he felt attached to the Old Bridge:
Here, we are so close to the bridge. It is difficult to explain but we do have a special relationship with the bridge. Nowhere in the world there is such a relationship between people and architecture.
98
During the reconstruction, I watched the workers putting almost every stone in. I saw how the bridge was built day by day and finally stood up. I was happy to be here during the reconstruction. During the opening ceremony, I was 200 meters away at the Koski Mehmet Pasha Camii and watched the ceremony from there. It was nice to have the old bridge again standing. Looking at the new old bridge with the same eyes [with which] I looked at the old bridge is kind of strange at the same time. Although we were happy to have a new bridge, we cannot compare it with the one we lost during the war. It is like losing a friend and then meeting a new friend.
The rebuilding of the bridge, though perhaps simply a replica which cannot compare with the original, can still somewhat soothe the feeling of loss. Mirza, Bosniak bridgekeeper and diver, feels more attached to the Old Bridge, since he uses Old Bridge as a workplace. Indeed, Mirza describes the reconstruction of Old Bridge as a rebirth:
Bridge is like a second house for me. I am a true bridge keeper. I work here at the Divers Club. I do not work here for myself. I work from my heart to make and keep this bridge clean. We collect the garbage and gum from the bridge. Jumping from this bridge has been my childhood dream. My father was also a diver. He jumped from the original bridge. I always watched videos of [him] jumping from the bridge. My father quit jumping after one of his friend died from jumping. Until the reconstruction, I jumped from other bridges and practiced at the cliff. When the bridge was rebuilt, I was so happy. I felt like I had been reborn.
99
The renewal of the bridge, for some who are deeply attached, symbolize a rebirth in life where connections can be made again with old memories and feelings. Nevertheless, some of the older generation of Croats have not fostered any place attachment to the Old Bridge. As Josip, a Croat priest in his early sixties, says,
I was born and raised here. This is my city. I was here during the war. My house and my church were demolished in the war. Every day during the war I buried young people. Why? Not only Old Bridge, every bridge was demolished during the war. We lost so many people during the war. The bridge is only a building. For me, holding someone's hand is more important than the bridge.
There were also a few young Bosniaks who had difficulty forming place attachment with the Old Bridge. For instance, Edin, a Bosniak waiter in his late 20s, who was seven years old when the bridge was demolished, recalls, "For me, it is just another building that was demolished during the war."
Although older-generation Croats and some younger-generation Bosniaks viewed the bridge only as a physical structure and building, most of the Bosniak residents likened the bridge to a human being. For instance, Amar, a Bosniak tourist guide in his late 20s, recalls, "Mostar is a small place and people here treat the bridge as the oldest member of their family." Emotional attachment with "the oldest member," then, seems to be self-evident.
Yet most of the residents I talked with differentiated between the original Old Bridge that was demolished during the war and the new rebuilt bridge, particularly given the emotion to be transferred from old to new, an act that requires efforts at assessment, reconnection, reconceptualization, and eventual acceptance of the new bridge. Comparing what was in the
100
memory—and continually reinvented through narration—to what is now standing and allowing the new to replace the old, compels reassignment of meaning and effortful sense-making, a struggle that may only partially be resolved.
Some residents shared how they felt when they first walked on the reconstructed bridge. Jasna, a Croat student, says that she was surprised when she crossed the bridge the first time because she thought it would be bigger, recalling, "it was smaller than I expected." Following the reconstruction of the bridge residents started to compare the new bridge with the old one. Amar, a Bosniak tourist guide, mentioned, "[The] shape is excellent but it's so shiny. We are waiting for the passing of a few years so it will be perfect when it is aged." An "aged" new bridge would come closer to the "old" bridge, in conception as well as memory.
Hamdija, a Bosniak graduate student, said, "Particularly [the] older people in my family call the original bridge DEDO (which means grandfather in Bosnian language)." Despite being in the same location and exhibiting a high degree of resemblance between new and old, Hamdija adds, "Older people say that they will never jump from the new bridge because it is not the same one." Hamdija says that, in the construction of the new bridge, some original stones from the older one had been used. He adds, "For my generation there is no big difference between the two bridges. But for the older generation, they think quite differently." Indeed, for those of the older generation, a "grandfather" can never, and perhaps should not, be replaced.
Likewise, Mirza, a Bosniak diver and bridgekeeper, recalls, "New bridge is not as same as the old one. I can see the differences from the pictures." Alija, a Bosniak university student from the eastern side, states that his family believes that "The original bridge was better than the new one because it was old. For them, the first one was the real one." Kresimir, a Croat
101
university student, recalls that the current bridge is different than the original, confessing that he and his friends make jokes about the bridge by calling it "the new old bridge."
There are also striking differences in how residents feel attached to the Old Bridge during and after the war. In the words of Hamza, a Bosniak painter in his forties:
During the war, it was "another world" "another time," [and] life was very different from the urban zone. During the war, I was living 200 meters from the bridge. There was shelling every day for four years. One day there was break in the shelling. I went out and saw the bridge was almost down but still standing. The same day [the] shelling increased and somebody said, "it is completely down." The bridge was destroyed. During the war, people were killed every day everywhere, then we did not care about the bridge. When the war was over, later we understood what we lost.
It is with reference to such temporal and historical contexts that residents narrate their attachment to Old Bridge, particularly through three specific events—the first day they ever saw the bridge; the day bridge was demolished; and the day they saw the new bridge.
Larissa, a Bosniak shop owner in her early thirties elaborates the first day she saw the bridge, recalling, "I was five or six years old when I first saw the bridge. I remember the jumping competition from the bridge. I was so impressed at that age." Larissa adds that she still remembers the day when the bridge collapsed. Larissa says, "It was such a sad day..." but then could not finish her sentence as suddenly her eyes filled with tears.
Edin, a Bosniak waiter in his late twenties recalls that he was four years old and with his family when he saw the bridge the first time. For Edin it was terrible to see the collapse of the
102
bridge. Edin emphasized he "was angry with the Croatian Army but not the Croat people." While narrating the day that he saw the new bridge, interestingly, Edin remembers most of the details of the opening ceremony and says that "there were more than 200 people so I waited in the line to cross the bridge on the first day." Likewise, Alma, a Bosniak student, offered details from the opening ceremony, recalling how crowded it was. Alma expressed her disappointment that she could only see the bridge from a distance on that day.
Some residents continued to feel attached to the bridge even after it collapsed. Isa, a Bosniak shop owner in his fifties, elaborates how he and his friends worked to protect the bridge during the war. In his words,
In 1992, Serbians attacks on the bridge [left] a small part demolished. In 1993, people from Mostar, including me and my friends, acted to protect the bridge. We put up the wooden bridge at night. But then a Croat tank destroyed the bridge. I did not feel any emotion when it fell down. I thought if love exists, even if only one stone of the bridge survives, it will eventually come back. Then elhamdulillah, we prepared korban when UNESCO organized the opening ceremony for the rebuilt bridge. Croatian newspapers told horror stories about how we prepared korban for the ceremony.
It is not surprising, then, that older-generation Bosniaks motivate the younger ones to connect with Old Bridge so that place attachment can be preserved. Ajla, a Bosniak university student, became emotional during our interview as she recalled that her father told her that, "Now you are a real Mostarian," the first time she crossed the bridge.
103
E. Symbol and Identities
Scholars (Carr et al., 1992; Duncan, 1990; Low, 2000; Rapoport, 1982) have focused on the relation between public space and social and cultural identities by highlighting the communicative and symbolic character of public space. Throughout history, Old Bridge has supported the needs of communities in celebrations and rituals; thus, as a public space, it "symbolize[s] the community and the larger society or culture in which [they] exist" (Carr et al., 1992, p. 23). Although there is no unified narrative concerning the symbolic nature of Old Bridge, its importance for Mostar is accepted unanimously. Yet there is a wide gap between age and ethnic groups in interpreting the symbolic importance of Old Bridge.
One can easily discern disputes over the meaning of the bridge among diverse social groups of Mostar. For Bosniaks, Old Bridge is their own cultural space. Its loss during the Bosnian War reminds them of the risk of their extermination from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Most Bosniaks that I interviewed still feel that threat, and are often eager to remind themselves what happened during the war and usually initiate talk about the Bosnian War on their own. To maintain their cultural identity, Bosniaks are both emotionally and symbolically attached to the Old Bridge.
While Bosniaks reaffirm their cultural identity as they look at, stand, and walk on the bridge, Croats refrain from connecting with the Ottoman past of Mostar. Croats also want to forget the past tragedies of the Bosnian War and thus usually refuse to talk about it. These differential perceptions and connections with Old Bridge may explain the observation that Croat residents mostly view Old Bridge as the symbol of Mostar city, thus alienating it from the Old Bridge. But for Bosniaks, Old Bridge is not only the symbol of the city but also a symbol of their cultural and ethnic identity—Bosniak residents interchangeably used the symbol of the city and the symbol of Bosniak and/or Muslim culture to define the bridge.
104
Marko, the Croat political activist, explains that he knows lots of Croat people who feel connected to the Old Bridge, as the bridge symbolizes the town. Marko adds that he is proud of Old Bridge, and that Mostar got its name from the bridge. Ana, a Croat student in her early twenties, narrates Old Bridge as the symbol of Mostar city. Ana says, "Whenever I think about Mostar, the first thing comes to my mind is Old Bridge." Although Croat interviewees accept the importance of Old Bridge as the symbol of Mostar, they do not necessarily understand its importance for Bosniaks. For instance, Mislav, a Croat student, explains that he does not understand why people are so emotional about Old Bridge, saying, "It’s kind of just a bridge." Yet he adds that Old Bridge is a symbol of the city, "whether people like it or not." Likewise, Marija, a Croat student, says that she does not think that Old Bridge is special, but it’s the symbol of Mostar. She adds, "If it was not so old, less people would go there."
These accounts diverge from the narratives of Bosniaks, who not only underline the importance of Old Bridge but also take pride in owning it. Damir, a Bosniak soldier, states that Old Bridge is a part of city culture and thus "every Mostarian should love it." Faris, a Bosniak student, says that Old Bridge is the symbol of both Mostar and the Ottomans, arguing that the bridge was built by the Ottomans for the city residents. Hamza, a Bosniak artist in his early forties, explains that Old Bridge is a unique example of Ottoman culture. Hamza praises Old Bridge for being different and the biggest of its kind and adds, "We can show other people what they do not have." Likewise, Armin, a Bosniak student in his early twenties, says Old Bridge and Mostar are interlinked. Armin recalls that people who are attached to the town are also attached to the bridge. Armin narrates Old Bridge as the symbol of Mostar and likens it to the Eiffel Tower in Paris. Adna, a Bosniak sales assistant, spoke about the natural beauty of Old Bridge,
105
saying, "Bridge is together with the river. You have to love it." Adin, a Bosniak shop owner, describes Old Bridge as "the soul of Mostar."
Although the residents I interviewed all agreed that Old Bridge is the symbol of Mostar city (though with different levels of emotional intensity) there are opposing views concerning whether the bridge connects Mostarians or not. For instance, Ajla, a Bosniak student, recalls that Old Bridge is known all over Europe, claiming that "it is one of the richest symbols of reconciliation, as it brings two parts together." Dialogically disputing this, Edvin, a Bosniak shop owner, argues that "it is not a real connection," considering the political divisions within the city. Likewise, Zlata, a Bosniak sales assistant, notes that Old Bridge itself cannot be the symbol of multiculturalism alone because there are many other bridges connecting the city.
Both Bosniak and Croat residents questioned the claims that a bridge, as a physical structure, can be sufficient to connect people. What seems most fundamental is the love, or what is inside people's hearts, that connects people. Edib, a Bosniak tourist guide, states that tourists visit Mostar only to see the Old Bridge. He adds, "[The] bridge is like a human being. It has its own story. It is very old. It [has] survived wars. But then it was destroyed by its own people. Citizens from this city demolished it." Praising the reconstruction project, Edib adds that now Old Bridge is "the symbol of new hope." Likewise, Isa, the Bosniak souvenir shop owner, likened Old Bridge to a human being, arguing that, "it [has] lived [through] so many things and survived." He elaborates, "For one town, [the] best symbol is the people not the bridge." According to Isa, Old Bridge is "the symbol of love." He continues, “People should love each other. Men without love should go out of the country."Kresimir, a Croat student, says they should build new things rather than renovating war-demolished buildings. Yet he adds that "Old Bridge is something unique and special. So it had to be rebuilt." According to Kresimir, Old
106
Bridge is a symbol connecting two sides. Kresimir says he would be very sorry if the bridge were to fall down again in the future.
F. Legends
Old Bridge retains cultural and political meanings that have been embedded in its structure. Some meanings of Old Bridge are historically shared and transmitted through telling stories and legends that have survived throughout history. Some legends provide a glimpse of how life in Mostar was back in the Ottoman Era, while others present the colorful and lively details of traditions.
Narratives depict Old Bridge as playing an important role in social interaction and celebrations in the past. Both Croat and Bosniak interviewees narrate how it felt to be on the bridge then, with the help of memories conveyed from their elders. Some learn legends at school even before seeing Old Bridge. For instance, Isa recalls that his late mother took him to the bridge when he was a child; "before that we learned about the bridge in school."
The legends, mostly narrated, are about the architect of Old Bridge and the construction process. According to the legend shared by many interviewees, in the past architect stood under the new bridge before the opening ceremony. If the bridge stood up, the architect would survive. If not, he would stay under the ruins of the bridge. Although interviewees did not mention the Ottoman Sultan when telling this story, the fear was that the architect stood under the bridge for the Sultan. This story could be interpreted in two ways on depending one's identity. The Sultan could be seen as a ruler controlling an Empire or as a ruthless dictator who refuses to accept fault or weakness.
It is also interesting to note that Croat residents narrate legends without naming any architect, while Bosniaks recall name Hayruddin. Also, Bosniaks prefer using the word "mimar"
107
which means architect in the Bosniak and Turkish languages. Yet both Croats and Bosniaks spoke about the legend using the word "Sultan" without actually naming "Sulejman the Magnificient," the Ottoman ruler who ordered the construction of the Old Bridge. Considering that the Ottomans ruled Bosnia for over four hundred years, it is obvious that more than twenty different Sultans ruled Bosnia during the Ottoman era. In the eyes of current Bosnian citizens, it seems that there is no difference among specific Sultans, so they do not emphasize any particular Ottoman Sultan.
For instance, Ajla, a Bosniak student, said, "Mimar Hajruddin escaped after the bridge was built, for fear of [the] Sultan." Marko, the Croat student political activist, spoke about how the architect fled Mostar after the construction as he was afraid that bridge could not stand up. Marko adds that the architect used eggs to fill and support the stones used in the construction process. Likewise, Ivan, a Mostarian student, notes that the architect of the Old Bridge never thought that Old Bridge would stand, so he fled the day before the opening ceremony. Despite the fact that both Bosniaks and Croats have diverse views on the current use and meaning of Old Bridge, both groups share similar legends and myths regarding past. In the field, I have heard various tellings of the same legend.
Some residents told a different version of the legend in which the architect was not lucky enough to escape Mostar. Mislav, a Croat student, claims that the architect of the bridge was killed by the Sultan after finishing the bridge. "Old Bridge was so beautiful," says Mislav, "the architect was killed so that he could not make a new one later." The death of the architect adds romance to the image of Old Bridge, especially if this Bridge would become the only one, never to be replicated. There are also frightening legends about the presence of dungeons under the Old Bridge. Ivan states that prisoners were kept in dungeons in inhumane conditions and that they
108
died due to the water and moisture of the river Neretva. This sense of darkness further adds to the mysterious, hence romantic, atmosphere of the Old Bridge.
There is also a romantic story about "a Mostarian girl and her scarf," told particularly by female respondents. Ajla says, "One day a girl was crossing over the bridge and her scarf fell down the river, due to wind. Then a young man jumped from the bridge to the river to retrieve her scarf." Ajla says this is a great story about being courage. Then she adds that the tradition of jumping from the river still continues. Likewise, Edin, a Bosniak waiter, spoke about the ongoing tradition of jumping, and claimed, "You are a real man when you jump from the bridge."
This story paves the way for, and romanticizes, the tradition of jumping from Old Bridge, thus connecting past to present through evocative human elements. During my fieldwork, I both observed and talked with the divers who still jump from Old Bridge. Mirza, one of the Bosniak divers, declared the jumping to have originated during the Ottoman Era: "In the past, young brave guys jumped to impress younger girls. Sultans and Ottoman begs watched their jumping and then awarded them with money." Mirza emphasizes that they try to keep this tradition alive. He says, "Now, we jumpers collect money from tourists. We collect money not only for good luck but also for keeping the bridge clean." Mirza adds that they even kept tradition alive during the Bosnian War through jumping from a wooden platform.
Mirza complains about the decreasing number of jumpers in Mostar. Being a diver is a kind of tradition in his family. Mirza’s father was also a diver. He recalls that his mother never warned him not to go to Neretva to jump. Yet, "Parents are more scared now," he says, "so there are fewer young people [who] come here to jump." For him, jumping is an ordinary occurrence, as he jumps every other day. Mirza talks about his jumping proudly and shows me a newspaper
109
photo taken of him with the Spanish King. Mirza recalls that he jumped with five jumpers for the Spanish King. Smiling he adds, "I guess we are the only ones who had swimsuits on while having photo taken with the King." He is also very excited about the annual jumping competition that occurs on the last day of July each year, and invites me to watch the annual competition, saying that is usually crowded day on the bridge that day.
In reproducing Ottoman era spatial practices such as jumping from Old Bridge, Bosniak citizens imagine the past through memories and reassert their cultural identity. For Bosniaks, Old Bridge reminds them of an Ottoman era where they felt more safe and peaceful as they are still under the influence of bitter memories of Bosnian War.
G. Divided City
In this section I explore how residents narrate living in divided Mostar in three different ways. First, while talking about the divided state of the city, residents refer to gaps in economic development between East and West Mostar. Second, residents refer to Old Bridge and the river as a geographical border separating the eastern part from the western. Third, residents feel that the division is a mental construct, strengthened by those of the older generation, politicians' rhetoric, and media images.
1. Economic Gap between East and West
Many residents, discussing living in a divided city, spoke of a huge development gap between east and west Mostar. For them, this economic situation leads to the idea of two different Mostars. East Mostar, where Bosniaks predominate, is less developed in terms of housing, infrastructure and business environment.
Edib, a Bosniak tour guide living on the west side before the Bosnian War, tells about the economic differences on both sides of Mostar. "During the war, they chased us so we moved to
110
east side," says Edib. He further states that the west side is more developed because the east side was pretty much destroyed during the war. He adds that all the big markets and shopping centers are in the west. Edib, who studied in a multiethnic school before the war, is not happy about living in a divided city. He concludes, "But after the war, everything changed." Likewise, Hamdija, a Bosniak tour guide, notes, "[the] west side of Mostar is more developed because there is economic monopoly on that side.” Indeed, west Mostar offers diverse business environment including big industrial companies such as Aluminium Company whereas east Mostar economy is mostly dependent on tourism revenues.
According to Bosniaks, the underdeveloped status of east Mostar is a direct result of the Bosnian War. "[The] west side is more developed compared to the east side," says Edvin, "because the west side only had one war while the east side had two." Edvin, a Bosniak souvenir shop owner, adds, "During the war, they (west side) had a normal life and they had an open border with Croatia which led to a black market." Likewise, another Bosniak souvenir shop owner, Isa, refers to the destruction of the east side during the war in the following terms: "Of course west Mostar is more developed compared to the eastern side because during the war all of the eastern side was demolished." Isa elaborates concerning the ongoing repercussions of the Bosnian War which affects the daily lives of Bosniaks on the eastern side. Isa says that now in his house, there are three families living together, as he is taking care of his sisters' families who lost their husbands in the war. Isa talks about how everything happens slowly in the east due to economic difficulties, as well as bureaucracy. He adds, "It took me twenty years to build the house. Then, I waited ten years to get my license to open a shop here on Old Bridge."
The economic gap between the two sides of Mostar is also brought up by Croat residents. Marija, a Croat student, refutes claims that Old Bridge connects the people of two sides. She
111
says, "Mostar is still divided and there is tension." According to her, Mostar will stay divided. She adds, "The situation is worse for the east side because here in the west, we are developed."
Mislav, a Croat student who was born on the eastern side but migrated to the west during the war, experiences differences first-hand. Mislav says,
We still have a house on the east side. After the war, we reconstructed it and my grandfather moved into the house. My father does not feel comfortable there because of incidents with the neighbors during the war so they moved to another town. I cross Old Bridge every day to go to our house on the east side where my grandfather and my dog are living.
Mislav adds that his grandfather is happy on the east side and he does not have any problems with his Muslim neighbors. Mislav says that when he crosses to the eastern side, he feels like he is visiting the countryside because there are no shopping malls.
Despite the economic gap, many residents I spoke with, from both sides, stated that, in their daily lives, they do not feel they live in a divided city. Ivan, who is actively involved in politics and defines himself a Mostarian, says that he feels that Mostar is a divided city only when there is a football game. He adds, "In my daily life, I live in a micro-cosmos. People around me, my circle of family and friends are mixed. I believe that vast majority of people in Mostar want to live a normal life. Only five percent are idiots, like hooligans, [who] want to live divided." Mislav elaborates on the "hooligans":
I do not always feel like I am living a divided city. On some occasions, I feel the tension and division. I am hopeful about the future. Occasionally, there are riots and fights between teenagers from both sides because of the stories they have
112
heard from their families. They are idiots. Last week, Croat hooligans (when Croatia lost to the Spain) wanted to cross to the east side. Police anticipated such an incident so [they] blockaded the entrance to the east side. The hooligans clashed with the police. I do not think that hooligans are real Mostarians. They aren't from Mostar. In order to protest this incident, I attended Chocolate Revolution. On that day, Spanish Square was packed with people from both sides. We organized a protest event on Facebook and young people from both sides of Mostar met to exchange chocolates.
2. A (Hoped for) Unified City Despite Geographical Division
Many residents, both Bosniaks and Croats, claimed that the division in Mostar is merely geographical. Jasna, a Croat student, says, "The river divides the city and the bridge connects." She adds that she does not feel as if she is living in a divided city because she has friends from both sides. "Also, I live in west side," she says "but I go to a university in the east side." Likewise, Damir, an Army officer, explains, "In my mind, Mostar is not separated. In the army, we are mixed. It's one town." Damir adds that there are many people who think like him. Tarık, a Bosniak lawyer, gets angry when I ask about the divisions within Mostar. He does not want to tell whether he is living in the east of Mostar or the west. Emphasizing he is only from Mostar, Tarık says Mostar is not divided. He adds that the Neretva divides Mostar but that "Old Bridge connects the city."
Some of the residents, both Bosniaks and Croats, I spoke with were true believers in a united Mostar. For instance, Mirza, a Bosniak diver, stated, "For me, Mostar is one city. There are no two sides." Likewise, Dragana, a Croat student, recalls, "People are not divided in Mostar but the politicians and media are."
113
A handful of residents I spoke with referred to increasing communication between Croats and Bosniaks. Alija, a Bosniak student, explains: "In Mostar, every year is getting better. We are moving in small steps. Now people [have] started to go each other's side. All problems will be forgotten in twenty years." Likewise, Sanja, a Croat student, although agreeing that Mostar is a divided city, mentions that things are changing gradually. Sanja says, "I have friends from the other side and I love hanging with them."
Yet some raised concerns about the stability of Mostar in the future. For instance, Nadija, a Bosniak communication student, says, "We live in a divided city and therefore sometimes I feel in danger." Nevertheless, Nadija says that she is still hopeful, as Mostar is better than it was five years ago. She adds that it will be better and better: "We did the Chocolate Revolution. It is a good start. There there were more people than [just] the football hooligans. We need more chocolate revolutions to bring both sides of town together." Likewise, Adela, a Bosniak manager, says, "In daily life, we communicate but the future is still a black hole."
Many residents I spoke with talked about the presence of prejudice among the ethnic groups in Mostar. For instance, Mislav said, "If I would have a Muslim girlfriend, my mom would hang me." Yet he adds that his grandfather, who lives on the east side, has good relations with Muslims. "My family is still skeptical," he says.
During my interviews, I observed that Croats mostly use "Muslim" to denote the Bosniaks while they define themselves as "Croats," that is, using only their ethnic identity. Bosniaks, on the other hand, use both “Muslim” and “Bosniak” while discussing their identities (depending on the topic), and use words such as "Croats" and "they" interchangeably while referring to Croats. Bosniaks continued to define themselves as a religious community rather than nationality until the twentieth century (Donia & Fine, 1994); and they were acknowledged
114
as a distinct nation by the Yugoslav Communist Party in 1968 (Malcolm 2002). Therefore, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Muslim and Bosniak identities are mingled.
According to Ivan, Mostar is a divided city because of nationalism. Ivan says that the current political situation in Mostar is unnatural: "This is a kind of disease killing Mostar day by day." Ivan believes that young Mostarians have to cure this, not tomorrow but eventually. Likewise, Faris, a Bosniak, complains about nationalistic politics. "We live in a divided city," he says, and "there is often tension." He praises the fact that the young are becoming more anti-nationalist: "When [the] younger generation comes into power, there will be a positive change."
According to Hamza, a Bosniak painter, there is considerable nationalism in Mostar. Hamza says Mostar is divided. "There is no flag of Bosnia-Herzegovina on the western side of Mostar, you only see Croat flags," he declares. He also mentions that Croats made the bell tower of the Croat Church taller after the war. Use of religious and ethnic symbols has become controversial in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. Croats have accused Bosniaks for building higher minarets for their mosques, while Bosniaks accused them of building higher bell towers for Croat churches.
When I was in the field, one incident showed me that use of religious symbols is a very sensitive issue in Mostar and easily susceptible to provocation. One day, I was at the Islamic Culture Center waiting for my interviewee's arrival. Haris, a Bosniak and an employee at the Center, rushed outside angrily and started to shout after seeing a car that had just been parked in front of Mahmud Babe Turbe (a tomb of Muslim elder). There was no driver inside the parked car. Haris called the police and while waiting for them to arrive he parked his car to blockade the parking car. At first, I did not get why Haris was so angry over a car parked in a "no parking" space. When I went to outside to stand next to him, Haris told me that the car belongs to the
115
Patriarch, showing me the sticker of Holy Cross on the car's windshield. Then, I sat on the pavement under the shade and observed. Until police arrived Haris continuously exclaimed:
They want to crush us—the Muslims—here. Look at the 33-meter Croat Church tower. And on the hill there is a 300-meters cross. We, Muslims in Mostar are still fighting for our existence. They always provoke us. That's why the Partriarch parked his car in front of a Muslim holy place. They expect us to wear Armani suits and negotiate with them. We cannot do that. We must react. For the Muslims, there are two options: fight or die.
Looking directly at me, Haris asked, "Do you see the Cross on the hill? That's where they bombed the Old Bridge. It is not possible [for us] to live together." I felt that my presence as an outside researcher led Haris to make such a big scene. It seems to me that Haris saw this incident as an opportunity to raise his concerns as a Bosniak. Besides me, there were a couple of tourists who stopped and watched the scene. I observed that locals paid Haris scene no attention. There were a couple of restaurants and souvenir shops around. Their owners and employees glanced over for a few minutes when they heard the shouting but then returned to their work.
When the police arrived, Haris grew calmer. Haris talked with two police officers far away; I could not hear them. Police officers put a note on the parked car and left. Then Haris left the scene. When Haris left, I went to one of the nearby restaurants for lunch. While ordering lunch, I asked the waiter whether he had seen the incident. He smiled and said, "Those incidents happen in Mostar every day." I wanted to interview the waiter but he declined, saying he was busy.
116
3. Those Who Are Culpable
Damir, the Bosniak Army officer, accuses current politicians as the reason Mostar is still divided. In order to highlight the absurdity of the situation, Damir laughingly says, "Compared to other countries, we need not only one political leader but three political leaders" to address this issue. Likewise, Josip, a Croat Priest, says that "Mostar is not divided. We are all one city." He adds, "Our problems are politics, economic and corruption. There are corrupt millionaires in this country."
Emphasizing that there are no problems among ordinary people, Amar, a Bosniak tour guide, says institutions are all divided in their concerns such as electricity, garbage and so on.
Sarcastically, he adds, "Only the City Mayor is unified." Speaking about problems in the educational system, he elaborates, "They call it 'two schools under one roof.' Students do not even see each other." According to Amar, the problem stems from politicians who do not want to lose their power. "If the same people continue to stay in the power," he says, "[a] divided situation will continue."
Adin, a Bosniak shop owner in his 30s, refutes that Old Bridge is connecting the city. He says "we all want one Mostar" but it`s impossible because there are provocations all the time. Adin adds that in daily life residents do not have problems but the city is politically divided. Then, he recalls the ongoing prejudices as the war memories are still fresh. In his words
We all have had friends from the other side before the war. But now we do not. I cannot say that I have Croat friends because during the war I saw how those friends turned into enemies with guns. It was like a Hollywood style movie: we were cheated by our best friends who used the guns first.
117
Of course, there are good Croat people who helped us during the war. But they were only a minority.
Sanja, a Croat student, says that her family is worried when she goes to the other side (East Mostar). Sanja is not hopeful about the future. She says, "Things will not change in the future. The problem is people who were at war are still alive and in power so they are making the decisions." She suggests that those of the younger generation should hang out together and do something for Mostar. She elaborates, "We are all human beings living in Mostar. Mostar belongs to us as well as them."
Vedrana, a Croat student, emphasizes that "Mostar is a truly divided city." Referring to the influence of misjudgments and stereotypes, Vedrana suggests that "parents should raise their children differently." According to her, it is the responsibility of older people working hard to unite the city. Likewise, Edib, a Bosniak tourist guide, underlines the role of families while saying he is not as optimistic about the future. Edib says, "New generations are taught to hate each other in their families. [The] new generation is so divided. They have their own side and we have our own side. We do not cross each other's side. Only for urgency will we go to the other side." Narrating a darker picture of Mostar, Edib concludes, "For me, it is like we are still at war but we just do not kill each other. No shootings anymore."
Similarly, Alma, a Bosniak sales assistant, notes that the children are growing through hearing stories from their families about the differences between two sides. Sadly, she says, "Older people [had] started to forget what happened in the past but now young people remember." She complains that young people in Mostar have started to engage in violence. She suggests that everybody should forget what happened in the past in order to live peacefully in
118
Mostar: "During the war my mother and sister have been shot but I try to forget what happened in the past."
Mirza, a Bosniak diver, recalls that memories of war keep Mostar separated. Mirza states, "In our Divers Club, we have 100 divers but only five of us are active. We are all Bosniaks despite [the fact] that Our Club is open to everyone. There has not been any Croat member joining the Club after the war."
Both Bosniak and Croat residents nostalgically praised the Tito era. For instance, Edin, a Bosniak waiter, recalls that his mother always talks about Tito's Yugoslavia and how she misses that era. According to Edin's mother, "Those were the times that you could sleep on this side or on the other side. Nobody would touch your soul," but sadly, "not anymore." Likewise, Kresimir, a Croat student, says, "My family also talks [about] how life was easier during the former Yugoslavia period. My family tries to look to the future not to the past but the political situation does not work currently. So they miss good days of the past."
Most of the residents I spoke with referred to the multicultural character of Mostar while saying that Mostar is only politically divided. Edib, a Bosniak tourist guide, praises the fact that Serbs have started to come back to Mostar, saying, "Mostar is again becoming a multicultural city."
Likewise, Hamdija, a Bosniak tour guide, claims, "Mostar is a truly multicultural city. There is a church on the other side and a mosque on this side. Division is all about politics." Complaining about the lack of a free media system, he says that all of the media spread the nationalist propaganda of the politicians. Hamdija adds that politicians use religion as a tool of politics. Like most of the residents that I interviewed, Hamdija states, "We the people are okay,
119
we communicate with each other." He also mentions that his girlfriend is a Croat and there is not any problems in daily life but somehow "we are mentally divided."
In a similar tone, Kresimir, a Croat student, recalls that he does not, in his daily life, feel as if he is living in a divided city, because he hangs out with a mixed group of people. Yet he adds that the political situation in Mostar is complicated for everyone. He confesses that he does not care about politics because he thinks that he cannot change. Kresimir praises the fact that his friends organized the chocolate revolution in Spanish square and that two to three hundred people attended. "Young people are coming together in Mostar," he says.
A handful of residents reminded me that the divisions in Mostar are still strong. For instance, Armin, a Bosniak student, recalls that "when bridge was rebuilt, most people had false hopes. They thought that building the bridge will make all city connected, but the situation is still the same and the city is divided." Likewise, Edib, the Bosniak tour guide, says, "If we just stop hating each other, then I see a better future. For now, Mostar is a beautiful but divided city."
Ajla, a Bosniak student, explains that Mostar is still a divided city. She recalls, "For some Croats, Islam has not supposed to be in Mostar. They are ashamed of Islam." Yet she adds, "My personal view is that there is not much difference between Croats and Bosniaks." Ajla says that the division is on the main street: Boulevard. In her words:
There are Croats in Mostar that have never been to the Old Bridge. I took many Croat friends to show them the bridge for the first time. First, they were afraid to visit the Old Bridge. They thought that somebody would insult them. Some of them took the pictures of the bridge. Some of them said that the bridge is not as big as it is on the pictures. But only few returned to Old Bridge alone.
120
Likewise, Isa, the Bosniak souvenir shop owner, recalls, "Croat students do not even come and visit the bridge." Nonetheless, Edin, a Bosniak waiter, says he has many Croat friends who also think of the bridge as a symbol of the city. Yet he adds, "Some of them say Muslim people mined the bridge during the war." Josip, a Croat priest, also accuses Muslims of demolishing the Old Bridge. According to Josip, "Serbians shelled the bridge during the first war. And when it became weak, Muslims demolished it. But now they blame Croats." Isa recalls, "They say that Bosniaks mined the bridge. And I ask them if we did that, why did I bomb my own house?" Those accounts depict the polyvocality of voices present in Mostar while each teller form individual narratives talking on those who are culpable.
121
V. THEMATIC ANALYSIS-GLOBALIZATION
Globalization has an enormous impact on both individuals and states politically, economically and culturally. As discussed earlier, places where individuals live are constantly affected by global forces, whether in the form of international authorities, foreign investment or brands (Appadurai, 1996; Giddens, 1990). Furthermore, the instrumental capacity and influences of nation-states has been decreasing. As shown earlier, globalization introduced the multiculturalism concept which has been promoted and implemented by international organizations (Robertson 1997).
In this chapter, I examine themes related to the concept of globalization. First, I explore the impact of international organizations in the daily lives of Mostar residents and how this influences their views of Old Bridge. Then I examine the notions of city branding and international tourism, as they constitute an important part of the Mostar’s economy. Finally, I explore howlocals view multiculturalism which has been a concept emphasized and promoted by international organizations in Bosnia and Herzegovina without imposing any dominant identity within the society.
A. Role of International Organizations
Globalization has led to a decrease in the political and instrumental capacities of states while the role and influence of international organizations has been aggregated (Castells, 2004). In the case of Old Bridge, the decisions of UNESCO and other international organizations, and how the Old Bridge is referred to, well illustrate how international organizations attempt to manage divisions through the politics of public space. In this section I discuss in detail how these international organizations have been praised and criticized by Mostar residents, who often feel that their daily lives are shaped by distanciated forces.
122
Despite the fact that Old Bridge still reflects the cultural conflicts within the city, international organizations consistently manipulate the spatial meaning of Old Bridge by promoting and enhancing the multicultural character of Mostar. As noted earlier, Old Bridge and the city of Mostar represent "an exceptional and universal symbol of coexistence of communities from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds" (UNESCO, 2008). Moreover, according to UNESCO (2010),
The Old Bridge area, with its pre-Ottoman, eastern Ottoman, Mediterranean and western European architectural features, is an outstanding example of a multicultural urban settlement. The reconstructed Old Bridge and Old City of Mostar is a symbol of reconciliation, international co-operation and of the coexistence of diverse cultural, ethnic and religious communities.
Ironically, during my fieldwork, I observed significant resentment towards international authorities and organizations, raised by both the younger and older generations of Mostar residents. This emotion can be particularly felt in the accounts of younger residents, who experience globalization firsthand and who are in contact with international organizations, in depicting the increasing role of international organizations and tourism in Mostar. The accounts of young informants are in line with Gidden' (1990) criticism of globalization that abstract and distanciated forces play an important role in structuring our local environment, whether in the form of capital or authority.
Interviewees often used the terms "international organizations" and "international community" interchangeably, in a general sense, when I questioned their interpretations of
123
globalization. However, they named mostly specific international organizations such as OHR, UNESCO and OSCE when referring to organizational decisions affecting Mostar.
The main reason for resentment is the claim that international organizations could not play an influential and preventative role during the Bosnian War. It is argued that international organizations triggered the military conflict in Bosnia through employing inappropriate policies. For instance, the UN arms embargo which aimed to prevent the escalation of war did not succeed, since some warring parties could violate the embargo utilizing their coastal and land borders (Donia & Fine, 1994). Furthermore, UN was highly criticized for its failure to protect human lives and to prevent ethnic cleansing during Bosnian War. During the Bosnian War, the worst massacre in Europe since World War II occurred in Srebrenica which was already declared a safe haven under the protection of international organizations. Criticisms along the same lines were noticeably voiced by residents in the field. For example, Marko, a young Croat student who defines himself as a political activist, asserts that particularly older generations who experienced the war firsthand resent the international community. Marko mentioned that his father always advises him that he should be careful while interacting with international organizations. History provides the context for the construction of meaning, and seems forever to be woven into the fabric of contemporary life, even down through generations.
Many residents also find the role played by international organizations in Mostar insufficient. When I asked about the role of international organizations in Mostar, Lamija, a Bosniak student who also works as a radio programmer in east Mostar, responded to me with more questions. She asked, "What have the international organizations done during the war period? And what are they doing now?" Then, Lamia answered the questions she had just raised. Lamija says that international organizations did nothing to prevent the war. "Now, they talk
124
about reconciliation and living together," she said. "Those are good but empty words." Emphasizing that people in Mostar cannot face the past, Lamija continued, "lying to each other and pretending everything is normal" will not solve problems until "we move on away from the ghosts of the past." During the interview, Lamija repeated that she did not trust international organizations because they all have their own interests. She recalls that "all of the international organizations exploited Bosnians throughout history."
Furthermore, international organizations have been criticized for their current policies, which have usually been regarded as lethargic or ineffective. Lamija criticized the international organization' emphasis on political pluralism: "Political pluralism here is only about quantity. We lack quality in Mostar." Her views reflect the structural problems in the political and administrative bodies of the country, as inherited with the Dayton Peace Agreement. For instance, weak state institutions which have been regarded as an outcome of Dayton usually led to political deadlocks and avoiding implementation of many decisions as all ethnicities' vote are required. To illustrate the complex picture, it should be noted that BiH has a rotating presidency consisting of a member from each ethnic group, and all have veto power on any legislation. Furthermore, the existence of institutions and regulations at the canton, entity and state level create inconsistencies and have made locals' daily lives more complicated. Although equal representation of all ethnic groups has been realized and many bureaucratic positions are been rotated among the ethnic groups, political pluralism has not created an efficient administrative environment within the country.
In Mostar, in addition to stated policies and goals concerning websites and various publications, most of the international organizations and non-governmental agencies also organize focus group activities to promote multicultural dialogue and reconciliation. A handful
125
of residents I interviewed, for example, regularly attend activities organized by nongovernmental organizations such as Nansen Dialogue. Yet the composition and character of such events has been mostly criticized for their limited outreach to all Mostar residents.
Ajla, a Bosniak student in her early twenties, mentioned that she works with ten different organizations which "work with the same group of people." Ajla suggests that international organizations should reach out to other people. Likewise, Marko, a Croat political activist quoted earlier, says that the organizations invite already liberal people repeatedly to their events to promote dialogue in Mostar. Marko suggests that international organizations should differentiate among the participants at their events. Although "inviting hooligans might be risky" in Mostar, Marko says "international organizations should try to reach out to conservative people as well as liberal ones." Marko adds that "we, the young generations, should also start our own initiatives." Similarly, Azra, a Bosniak sales assistant in her late twenties, a regular attendee at the activities of international organizations, elaborates that they have "good dialogue because we all share same kind of liberal views." Yet Azra adds, suspiciously, it is not known whether they "constitute the majority in Mostar." Though efforts aimed at multicultural dialogue and reconciliation have been extended by some, results tend to be limited to similarly minded people, and thus there is still much to do to embrace multiculturalism in Mostar.
International organizations have also been criticized for excluding those of the older generations and politicians from their activities. Edib, a Bosniak who works as a tour guide in an Islam Culture Center, suggests that organizations should invite both young and old people to their activities to promote multiculturalism. Edib says that "when old people die, their ideas die with them." The older generation should teach young people that war is not good. Thus, young people can learn from their elders not to hate each other. Acknowledging the positive efforts of
126
the international organizations, Hamza, a Bosniak painter in his mid-forties, argues that international organizations should aim at outreach toward political leaders, since hatred propaganda comes from them.
The decisions of international organizations have usually been found uninformed and ineffective by Mostar residents. Nadija, a Bosniak student who studies communication, says, "International organizations make decisions without actually coming and talking to us." Nadija adds that international organizations usually do not see what is actually happening in Mostar. Likewise, Sanja, a Croat student, emphasizes that "decisions from locals are more important," considering the fact that international organizations were not in Mostar during the war.
While in the field, I observed visible economic and developmental differences between the east and west parts of the city. East Mostar has the look of a village in terms of housing, facilities and poor infrastructure, whereas West Mostar is more urbanized with developed housing projects and shopping malls. Economic polarizations and developmental differences among and within the cities, accompanying globalization, have also been raised by scholars like Sassen (1991). Furthermore, some (Barber, 1995; Klein, 1999; Rapley, 2004) have argued that income inequalities and developmental differences work to create a vicious circle which is likely to turn into violence.
Nevertheless, although globalization has a darker side, it also presents novel ways to overcome inequalities through introducing opportunities to increase capabilities for further development (Sen 2008). Likewise, a number of residents underscored the fact that international organizations should introduce more development projects. Mislav, a Croat graduate student who was born in East Mostar but migrated to West Mostar during the war, spoke about the significant development differences between the two sides in terms of housing and business diversity.
127
According to Mislav, the main reason for underdevelopment on the east side is political. Although "international organizations cannot force us to connect," they can work for the development of the east side of Mostar as well as the west side, Mislav says. Likewise, Haris, a Bosniak IT student, notes that the eastern side is underdeveloped and says that international organizations should help Mostar to develop equally.
UNESCO's decision to add Old Bridge to the World Heritage List could be regarded as a positive step in helping Mostar's development through creating jobs, investment opportunities and income in tourism sector. Yet my informants voiced their complaints about the inefficiencies of the organization in preserving Old Bridge as a heritage site.
When I analyzed UNESCO documents on the World Heritage List in general and Old Bridge in particular, I came across detailed information about organizational decisions and projects on how to preserve universal heritage sites. The UNESCO website9 references many laws that serve to protect Old Bridge heritage site, including Law on Implementation of Decisions of the Commission to Preserve National Monuments of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2002); Law on the Protection and Use of Cultural, Historical and Natural Heritage of SR Bosnia and Herzegovina (1985); and Law on Physical Planning and Land Use at the Level of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2006). Along the same lines, in terms of management, the Management Plan for the Old City of Mostar was implemented to preserve and protect the universal value of the site. The plan also defines necessary activities in order to ensure "adequate management, the sustainable use of the World Heritage property in a way appropriate to its Outstanding Universal Value, cultural and historical features, sustainable protection and conservation of cultural values" (UNESCO, 2010). These overarching laws and rules, and plans
9 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/946
128
and activities imposed from above, while ensuring consistent protection of all World Heritage Sites, may at the same time constrain the creativity and prove less than able to cater to the special needs of a specific site such as the Old Bridge and Mostar.
Furthermore, a Master Plan was adopted by the government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and a special agency responsible for the preservation, development, site management and monitoring was established by the Mostar City Council. On its website, the roles and responsibilities of Old Town Agency10 are defined as:
- Protection of the cultural-historical and the natural heritage of Mostar;
- Regular preservation and the protection of property in the zone of the Old Bridge in the old city part of Mostar, as a new world heritage;
- Implementation of the management plan as well as other expert assignments and responsibilities regulated in the Convention on World Heritage and the Operational Guidelines for Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (February 2005) and other documents which regulate the regular preservation of the world heritage;
- Cooperation with city agencies and the city governing organizations in the strategic planning process and the planning of the zone of the Old Bridge in the old city part of Mostar;
- Coordination of activities with the city agencies in the field of physical planning and maintenance of the zone of the Old Bridge in the old city part of Mostar
- Preparation of proposals, development programs and policies, as well as economic, cultural, educational and other activities with a view to revitalize the zone of the Old Bridge in the old city part of Mostar;
- Promotion of the zone of the Old Bridge in the old city part of Mostaras a cultural centre through cooperation with cultural, educational, touristic and related institutions;
- Setting up and maintenance of an electronic spatial database and its inclusion into the unified city spatial information technology system;
- Carrying out other expert assignments in the field it was established for.
Old Town Agency works in close cooperation, and implement projects, with other heritage protection institutions within the country. For instance, Old Town Agency set up video
10 http://www.asgmo.ba/
129
surveillance cameras in Old Town area wirelessly and used special assembly techniques not to change or disturb the look of the old part of the city (Old Town Agency, 2014). Although Old Town Agency implements projects which are monitored and reviewed by UNESCO, both organizations seem to suffer from incapability in outreaching to the local communities. Indeed, UNESCO failed to deliver its message to the locals in Mostar, as it is highly criticized by interviewees due to its lack of oversight and management in preserving Old Bridge. As it is up to the locals to uphold the site as worthy of the world heritage designation, problem arises when there is disconnect between these international/state entities and the locals.
Interviewees had differing views on whether UNESCO’s decision to rebuild the bridge and add it to the World Heritage List illustrates the cultural significance of Old Bridge, both for Bosniak's cultural identity and for Mostar. In considering my question on that decision, there appeared to be mixed interpretations with regard to the impact of the decision. Generally, the residents I interviewed described it as a positive step toward reconciliation in Mostar. Azra says that UNESCO wants to improve connections between the two sides. For Azra, UNESCO's decision works "to heal Mostar." A handful of residents from both sides, for example Mislav and Alija, find the decision beneficial for tourism and promoting Mostar.
While praising UNESCO's decision, most of the interviewees criticized UNESCO over the organization's inability to provide further inspection and protection for Old Bridge and its surroundings. Isa, a Bosniak, complained that UNESCO only put up a plaque denoting Old Bridge as a national monument that was under UNESCO’s protection. According to Isa, that protection is only on paper. Questioning UNESCO’s presence, Isa mentioned that any representative from the organization does not come to Mostar to inspect the site. Isa argues that UNESCO should regularly check whether residents or tourists harm Old Bridge by putting
130
something on the walls or drawing graffiti on its stones. Similarly, Edvin, a Bosniak souvenir shop owner in his late twenties, complained about the lack of UNESCO inspection and activity in Mostar, apart from the reconstruction of Old Bridge, saying that there are still more unconstructed buildings. Edvin adds that "there is no control and order" and points the abundance of red promotional parasols around Old Bridge.
Likewise, Isa complained about the parasols that were used by cafes and restaurants around Old Bridge, insisting that these create visual pollution. Particularly, he calls attention to the red parasols which carry the logo of a popular soda drink known globally. Furthermore, Amar, a Bosniak tourist guide who lives on the west side of Mostar, emphasized the challenge of taking any photo of Old Bridge without the promotional red parasols at the background. The point raised by Isa, Edvin and Amar comprised some of my first observations in the field while photographing Old Bridge. I observed that using parasols with different colors and logos of global brands do not seem to be in harmony with the architecture, thus obscuring the beauty of the Old Bridge. Economic gains and cultural artistry sometimes are at conflict with each other.
Although the reconstruction of Old Bridge has been supervised by UNESCO through financial aid, notably by Turkey, Italy, the Netherlands and France, managed by the World Bank, all of the residents I spoke with claimed that Old Bridge was reconstructed by Turkey. Considering that the original Old Bridge was built during the Ottoman Empire, most of the residents automatically think that Turkey carried out the reconstruction. UNESCO’s lack of presence and outreach activities aggravates such perceptions. Although Turkey offered to cover the whole reconstruction process, the Mostar city government asked for an international project (Popovac, 2006). In the field, I observed that both Croats and Bosniaks use the names “Turkey” and “Ottoman Empire” interchangeably, as they regard Turkey as the heir to the Ottoman
131
Empire. The Bosniaks I interviewed particularly emphasized that reconstruction of Old Bridge could not finish without Turkey's support and assistance.
UNESCO has also been criticized for making decisions without considering the views of locals. For instance, Isa recalls that the original Old Bridge had 99 steps, referring to Allah’s 99 names mentioned in the Quran. Isa says that they told UNESCO to put 99 steps on the reconstructed bridge but their request was overlooked by UNESCO during the reconstruction. Isa expands his criticism to all international organizations and elaborates that they act without respecting local traditions and cultures. Isa complains that international organizations usually try to change local culture without understanding it. He spoke about the tradition of taking off one’s shoes when entering a mosque or any Muslim’s house where people pray on the kilim (small hand woven carpet). According to Isa, "All Bosnia is a kilim. You have to take off your shoes when you come to Bosnia." Yet international organizations fail to acknowledge this, Isa says. Managing culture at the international level appears to be an impossible, or at least a paradoxical undertaking, as it may not be in tune with what is conceived at the local level, whether for cultural, pragmatic, or political, reasons.
Occasionally, I observed that there are residents who belittle UNESCO's decisions. Adin, a Bosniak shop owner in his thirties, cannot comprehend the hyperbole concerning the World Heritage List, noting that "Old Bridge has always been famous even long before the UNESCO decision." Likewise, Kresimir, a Croat university student in his late twenties, explains that UNESCO’s list does not help Mostarians in real life as the city is still divided. Furthermore, Kresimir claims that all international organizations, including UNESCO, apply a double standard in their treatment of Bosnia and Herzegovina, arguing that there are buildings older than the Old Bridge all around the world in urgent need of protection. According to him, Old Bridge was
132
picked, not because of its historical importance or architectural quality, but because it was demolished during the war.
Most of those with whom I spoke not only knew about UNESCO's work, but had much to say about it. It was rare that I spoke with residents who had no information on UNESCO's decision. One, Sanja, a Croat student, was puzzled when I asked about UNESCO, saying that she has never heard about their decision. Aside from this exception, the fact that locals know about UNESCO's work shows that such distanciated forces are in fact not that distant at all.
In discussing the current role of international organizations, every resident I spoke with also mentioned the Office of the High Representative, "an ad hoc international institution responsible for overseeing implementation of civilian aspects of the accord ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina" (OHR, 2010). Considering the special status of OHR and its extraordinary powers, OHR has, within the community, been the most resented of international organizations. For example, Ivan, who prefers to define himself as a Mostarian rather than assert an ethnic identity, criticizes OHR representative Inzko, saying that Bosnian politicians should make their own decisions: "It is their job and responsibility." Referring to the high salary of the OHR representative, Ivan claims that "they enjoy their privileges here but do nothing." Similarly, Edin, a Bosniak waiter, elaborated that OHR and other organizations are looking out for their own interests. The power struggle between OHR and local government renders locals' identities exploited and disadvantaged, particularly through the forces of globalization.
A few interviewees likened the role of current international organizations to the empires which ruled Bosnia and Herzegovina in the past, including the Ottoman Empire and the Austria-Hungarian Empire. For instance, Marko, a Croat student, says that "international organizations look above us from higher perspective as the imperialists did in the past." Kresimir
133
acknowledged that, as Mostarians, they need the assistance of international organizations; however, they do not need any pity.
After the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Ivan said that "Bosnia became a colony through international organizations, banks and companies." According to Ivan, international organizations are like "lice" exploiting the locals. Similarly, Armin, a Bosniak student, explains that “even long before the globalization, decisions on Mostar were decided abroad,” referring to the Berlin Congress in 1878. My observations in the field show an impression among Mostar residents that the international organizations replaced the empires in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Accounts of locals reflect the fact that globalization has not been new to Bosnia and Herzegovina. In light of the historical experience, Balkans was not only a place of multicultural coexistence of many ethnic and religious groups, but also of extensive international intervention since the early 19th century. Yet, the most recent wave of globalization and its distinct elements such as international organizations are new to Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Although the establishment of OHR was a prerequisite to end conflict and to build stability in the aftermath of Bosnian War, its authority, surpassing local and national administrative bodies, found criticism within the country. The Dayton Peace Agreement, which ended the Bosnian War, also established the OHR, "an ad hoc international institution responsible for overseeing implementation of civilian aspects of the accord ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina" (OHR, 2010). According to Article II of Annex 10 of the Dayton Peace Agreement, the roles and responsibilities of the High Representative are as follows:
Monitor the implementation of the peace settlement;
Maintain close contact with the parties to the Agreement, to promote their full compliance with all civilian aspects of the Agreement;
Co-ordinate the activities of the civilian organizations and agencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina to ensure the efficient implementation of the civilian aspects
134
of the peace settlement. The High Representative shall respect their autonomy within their spheres of operation while as necessary giving general guidance to them about the impact of their activities on the implementation of the peace settlement;
Facilitate, as the High Representative judges necessary, the resolution of any difficulties arising in connection with civilian implementation;
Participate in meetings of donor organisations;
Report periodically on progress to the United Nations, European Union, United States, Russian Federation and other interested governments, parties and organizations. (OHR, 2010)
OHR headquarters are based in Sarajevo with two regional offices in Banja Luka and Mostar. The office in Mostar was closed on June 30, 2010, as progress was accomplished in Mostar. Yet interviewees' accounts reveal that its political influence is still felt among the locals. This criticism mostly stems from the substantial powers, which are known as the Bonn powers, given to the OHR in 1997 to prevent any local obstructions in implementing Dayton agreement. Bonn powers allow "High Representative to remove from office public officials who violate legal commitments and the Dayton Peace Agreement, and to impose laws as he sees fit if Bosnia and Herzegovina's legislative bodies fail to do so" (OHR, 2014).
Although the roles and authorities of international organizations are highly criticized in the field, their essential roles in preventing conflicts and furthering positive commitments are highly praised. There are also many residents who spoke about the positive role of international organizations and asked for preemptive action in terms of alleviating the impact of radical and ultranationalist politicians in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Adin presented a view bereft of hope for the future of Mostar. Adin works on the Bosniak-populated east side of Mostar while living on the Croat-populated west side of the city, and thus experiences living in a divided city first hand. Referring to the past ethnic conflicts occurring in the region, Adin sadly says they fight every fifteen years. Talking about the younger generation’s increased use of social media to spread
135
hatred, Adin pleads for further assistance from international organizations. Adin says that otherwise there would be another war in fifteen years.
Acknowledging the assistance of international organizations in solving problems in Mostar, Alija, a Bosniak student, complains that politicians in Bosnia and Herzegovina do not implement the decisions of the organizations. Alija recommends further enforcement by international organizations. Likewise, Amar, a Bosniak, says that international organizations are not doing enough to force local politicians to comply. Referring to the extraordinary powers of OHR, Amar notes that politicians should be removed when they fail to agree and compromise in Parliament. Similarly, Isa defines the Dayton Agreement as the "product of intelligent people," praising the mutual agreement and compromise requirements introduced in it. Isa smiles and says that "it is such complicated process that local politicians' hands are tied down."
Armin, a Bosniak student, while acknowledging that OHR has done good things in the past, says there still needs to be further effort. Armin notes that OHR should influence local politicians to engage in dialogue and to be more constructive. Armin praised the Nansen Dialogue Center and United Worlds College for their efforts to connect both sides. Yet Armin was skeptical regarding the efforts of international organizations, citing the continuing presence of divided schools in Mostar. Although the situation is better than ten years previous, as people started coming together, Armin says "a miracle should happen" so that the international organizations can unify Mostar.
The roles played by various international organizations, including UNESCO, OHR, and others, are multifaceted, and residents' feelings and expectations also vary. While they criticized the seemingly distant organizations' less successful enterprises concerning various local affairs, they also hoped that these organizations can do better. The local, day-to-day life of Mostar
136
residents is not detached from globalization, but is very much connected, spanning politics, economics, culture, tourism, and many other domains, as reflected in these accounts of the organizations' performance.
B. City Branding and Tourism
In line with the transformationalist view of globalization, both nation-states and their citizens experience political, social and economic reconfigurations (Castells, 2000; Giddens, 1990; Rosenau, 1990). As national borders seem to have become increasingly more obsolete and transparent, particularly in Europe, globally the number of tourists has increased. Accordingly, countries have started to make themselves and their cities more visible and attractive both for tourism and investment. City branding emerged as an instrument to differentiate one city from others by using marketing tools, including memorable phrases and slogans in promotional materials. Yet increasing economic competition between countries also requires the protection of local culture. Indeed, the promotion of local culture has been an ongoing topic in scholarly discourse (Robertson & Khondker, 1998).
In this section, I focus on how Mostar residents narrate the role of Old Bridge in branding Mostar and thus its impact on tourism. Most residents share their concerns about the political and economic situation of Mostar while talking about Old Bridge, demonstrating how the bridge and Mostar are interlinked.
All my interviewees acknowledged the positive impact of Old Bridge in attracting tourists to Mostar. Marija, a Croat student in her early twenties, says that Old Bridge is the most beautiful place in Mostar. Marija adds that people from around the world come to see it. Kresimir claims that the new Old Bridge has increased the visibility of the city and thus put Mostar on the world map. Kresimir says that he is proud because Old Bridge is the first image
137
that comes up when people search for Mostar on the Internet. These accounts are in line with the image portrayed by BH Tourism: "The bridge is Mostar's core and its reconstruction means that life is slowly but surely returning to normal in what is most certainly the most beautiful city in Bosnia and Herzegovina [bold print in original]"11 (Association of Federation of BiH, 2005). The stunning beauty of the Old Bridge's architectural design is portrayed consistently as the most prominent historical and cultural treasure in Mostar.
Edin, a Bosniak waiter, declares that tourists are coming not only to see Old Bridge but because "Mostar has a soul." Edin bet that I would also return to Mostar. Considering my several visits to the city after finishing my fieldwork on Old Bridge, I have to agree with him. I long for Mostar upon seeing a photo of Old Bridge and hearing the word "Mostar."
Residents like Ajla, a Bosniak student, highlight the role of UNESCO's decision in increasing the number of tourists coming to Mostar. Ajla says that tourism is not only good for Mostar but also beneficial for the economies of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Currently, tourism is viewed as the only economic force developing the city. Ivan, who defines himself as a “real Mostarian” who eschews ethnic identity, recalls that before the war Mostar had three to four industrial complexes. However, now Mostar produces nothing and tourism is the only source of income for many residents. Likewise, Edin, a Bosniak waiter who works at five different cafes to earn a decent salary, cites the high level of unemployment in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Edin praises tourism as the only option for creating jobs in Mostar.
Although both Croat and Bosniak residents acknowledge the benefits of tourism for Mostar, they criticize city officials for failing in their efforts to employ city branding, supply tourism infrastructure, and regulate tourism efficiently. Globalization urges any group or nation 11 http://www.bhtourism.ba/eng/mostar.wbsp
138
to depict the uniqueness of their culture among others. Presenting a specific image of a place to attract foreign capital, investment and/or tourists has become a requirement for survival in a global world (Kotler & Gertner, 2002).
Residents I interviewed emphasized the necessity of employing corporate marketing techniques as tools to differentiate Mostar from other cities. Edib explains that Mostar has a huge potential for tourism which has been neglected by city officials. Edib says that politicians and local authorities should do more city branding to promote Mostar. Likewise, Armin, a Bosniak student, spoke about the need for a more comprehensive city branding strategy to make tourists stay longer in Mostar. During my fieldwork, I observed that tourist convoys mostly visit Mostar on a day trip. Armin says tourists visit the whole city for about two hours and then leave. My observation is that tourist groups prefer to stay in Sarajevo or in Medjugorce, a town 25 km southwest of Mostar where there is a Catholic shrine. Armin suggests that Old Bridge could be used as a venue for cultural events and concerts to make tourists stay longer in the city. Likewise, Edib emphasizes the need to organize extracurricular activities such as Jeep safaris or provide swimming pools for tourists. During the summer months of my field trip, I observed that Mostar has mild humid weather reaching 34 degrees C. This hot weather suggests the need for cooling options such as swimming pools. Although divers jump from Old Bridge and locals enjoy swimming in the Neretva river, this might be too risky for tourists.
Most of the residents with whom I spoke mentioned the lack of tourism infrastructure in Mostar as the main cause for tourists not to seek lodging in the city. According to Dragana, who a Croat student in her early twenties, it would be smarter to build hotels before large groups of tourists arrive in Mostar, so they can be accommodated in Mostar. Likewise, Edib, the Bosniak tour guide, spoke about the need to increase both the number and quality of accommodation
139
options in Mostar. Edib mentioned that Old Town Mostar lacks accommodation options while nearby Medjugorce offers more hotel facilities. Indeed, a close look at the accommodation facilities depict that the city of Mostar has a capacity of 2,408 beds whereas Medjugorce has 20,500 beds (Mostar airport, 2017). Edib also criticized the fact that there are no direct flights to Mostar despite the presence of an airport. After Edib's account, Mostar fully opened its airport to civil aviation in 2012 and currently there are direct flights from various locations, including Italy, Germany and Lebanon. Yet the focus is not so much about the Old Town of Mostar and Old Bridge. According to the Mostar airport company's brochure,12 for example, the main reason for flying to Mostar is its proximity to the Marian shrine of Medjugorce which is 30 km away. The Old Town of Mostar and Old Bridge have been noted as tourist sites, along with other nearby locales, including Neum, Blagaj and Pocitelj. A close look at the narratives of the brochures and descriptions of the main routes of passengers flying from Catholic countries show that Mostar airport projects itself as a gateway to the Catholic pilgrimage destination (Mostar Airport, 2017).
There are still problems even when one focuses on the branding of the Old Bridge. Ivan, the "real Mostarian" who works as vice-president of a political party's youth organization, criticizes current city branding efforts in Mostar. Ivan is troubled that officials use only the Old Bridge to attract tourists. Ivan says that, in city branding, people should be used—or that the human element should be emphasized—rather than just promoting architectural buildings. Ivan cites a famous poet, Pero Zubac, who wrote the "Mostar Rains" poem (see appendix K)and notes that there is no street in Mostar named after Zubac.
Also, according to Ivan, Mostar cannot profit from city branding because the city is an area unregulated for tourism. To better protect the city and regulate tourism, Ivan suggests that
12 http://mostar-airport.ba/download/Company%20Profile%20ZL%20Mostar%20ENG_F.pdf
140
tourists should pay an entrance fee to enter Old Town where Old Bridge is located. Likewise, Alma, a Bosniak sales assistant, states that tourists should be charged for visiting Old Bridge and its surroundings.
While tourism brings economic gains, it also causes locals to lose something, putting respondents in an ambivalent situation. Edin, the Bosniak waiter, says that Mostar is under the influence of a global economy. According to him, everybody encourages consumption on Old Bridge while nobody, including shop owners, cares about the preservation of Old Bridge. He argues that shop owners only think about their profits, which they later share with politicians who act like criminals. His account parallels criticism brought by Lefebvre (1997) with respect to the impact of globalization on space. As Old Bridge turns into a global space with the arrival of increasing numbers of tourists, it is further consumed both economically and literally (Lefebvre, 1997, p. 122).
Old Bridge has been transformed into a workplace for shop and restaurant owners, where there is a persistent tourist presence. As locals perceive Old Bridge as a tourist locale, they also feel alienated from Old Bridge. In a sense, Old Bridge as a space has turned into "a void waiting to be filled" and "a medium waiting to be colonized" (Lefebvre, 1997, p. 125). This perception was underlined in some residents' narratives, which criticized the decreasing status of Old Bridge as a public space which should be open and accessible to everyone.
Armin spoke of the negative effects of tourists on the locals' daily lives. For instance, Armin claims that during the summer locals cannot walk around Old Bridge, as all the cafes put their tables outside, thus obstructing residents. Likewise, Dragana, a Croat student who studies journalism, mentions that she prefers staying on the western side of the bridge where there are fewer tourists. Dragana says that she misses the old days of Mostar before the tourists discovered
141
it. "Those were the days that we talk about the history of Old Bridge," says Dragana, "now all we talk about is the numbers of tourists." Economic profits seem to have been gained at the expense of the site's cultural and historical significance. According to Dragana, tourists take photos of Old Bridge to prove they visited, not because of its historical value. I observed that there is some resentment among locals that history has been replaced with tourism in Mostar.
Although tourism has been an important source of economic development, Mostar suffers from seasonality in its tourism industry, which affects business viability in the region. During fieldwork, I observed that the number of tourists increases during the spring and summer seasons. For instance, one hot day in July, I found walking on Old Bridge a challenge because of the crowds of tourists. On the other hand, one rainy October day, I was the only one on the bridge. My observations were confirmed by most of the interviewees. Complaining about the lesser number of tourists in the winter, Edin said that "only cold and winter" are here. Likewise, Hamza, a Bosniak painter, explains that Old Town becomes deserted during the winter. Hamza says that the silence and solitude that dominate Mostar then are as "monuments forgotten" by tourists. Hamza sadly adds that those are the days that "only wind comes to visit Old Bridge." Observing Old Bridge during the winter season, I understand his sadness. Although Old Bridge resembles a beautiful medieval town where time stopped, during one of my December field trips, I felt alone and gloomy.
A handful of residents had negative comments regarding tourists who discriminate against certain ethnic groups. Isa, the Bosniak owner of a souvenir shop on Old Bridge, complained that some tourists do not buy souvenirs from shops owned by Muslims. Isa says that such tourists had been warned by some tourist guides that profits from Muslim-owned shops go to fundamentalist groups. Noting that tourists coming from EU countries ask his name and
142
religion before deciding whether to shop, Isa says, "this is not tourism." Isa, however, praises globalization for sanctioning the diversity of tourists visiting Mostar. In his words,
We are happy to host tourists coming from outside of Europe. For the last 100 years, information came only from the West. Similar ideas and even biased ones came through in the past. But thanks to globalization this is changing. Muslim people are more united now. There are tourists coming from United States, Canada, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey and so on.
Mirza, a Bosniak diver who jumps from Old Bridge into the Neretva River in an attempt to keep a Mostar tradition alive, says that he usually feels alienated because tourists do not communicate with him. Trying to collect money from tourists before a jump, Mirza says that tourists hide their bags when they see him. Mirza says that money he collects is used to keep the Old Bridge clean. As bridgekeepers, members of the Divers Club daily collect garbage and gum from Old Bridge. Mirza told me that he does not understand why tourists are afraid of him. During my fieldwork, I witnessed several dives, including Mirza's. A couple of times, I overheard tour guides warning their groups to watch out for pickpockets on the bridge. This might be one of the reasons tourists hide their bags on Old Bridge. I observed that divers ask for money before jumping, without stating that the money goes for the cleaning of Old Bridge. Furthermore, some divers are aggressive in soliciting money from tourists, shouting that they would not jump until they have collected two hundred Euros.
Lack of information about the reasons for collecting money, together with aggressive behavior, are likely to lead to avoidance of communication between tourists and divers. Yet most of the tourists were willing to give money to witness and record such a brave act, recording the event with their cameras. In that sense, divers jumping from Old Bridge has been transformed
143
from a local tradition into a tourist spectacle. Pašić (2006) mentions that the tradition of diving from Old Bridge into the Neretva was not interrupted even during the Bosnian war. This tradition dates back to the 17th century as recorded in the notes of Evliya Çelebi—a famous Ottoman traveler—and still continues (Pašić 2006). Yet today this tradition has turned into an economic activity as divers collect money from tourists before jumping from the bridge. To borrow from Lefevbre (1997), what we witness on the bridge could be interpreted as the "consumption of the cultural past" (p. 123). In a sense, long-lived cultural traditions in Mostar have been turned into a tourist attraction in the post-war economic recovery period.
C. Multiculturalism
As globalization leads to diverse groups of people coming together, multiculturalism has become a familiar concept used by international organizations and companies. How nation-states deal with the existence of multiple groups or diversity has gained importance as common norms on human rights have become acknowledged universally. Multiculturalism implies the existence of multiple ethnic and cultural identities without imposing any dominant identity in the society. In particular, multiculturalism has been put forward as a practical tool to preserve peace and stability in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Earlier I noted how multicultural coexistence is one of the main themes of UNESCO's inclusion of the Old Bridge and the city of Mostar as a world heritage site. That multiculturalism is so strongly endorsed that even the Bridge's stunning architectural beauty reflects exactly this focus. According to UNESCO (2010),
The Old Bridge area, with its pre-Ottoman, eastern Ottoman, Mediterranean and western European architectural features, is an outstanding example of a
144
multicultural urban settlement. The reconstructed Old Bridge and Old City of Mostar is a symbol of reconciliation, international co-operation and of the coexistence of diverse cultural, ethnic and religious communities. (UNESCO, 2010).
Emphasizing not only Ottoman but also Mediterranean and European features of the site’s architecture, UNESCO highlighted the multicultural aspects of the Old Bridge. Furthermore, UNESCO once again underlined the symbolic status of the bridge in connecting diverse communities living in Mostar.
Similarly, a tourism brochure published by Herzegovina-Neretva Canton Tourist Board defines Mostar city as the cultural, political and financial centre of the Herzegovina region in Bosnia and Herzegovina:
Already with the first encounter with this beautiful city, you will feel its diversity which makes it so special. Its charm rests in its streets interwoven with the spirit of many different civilisations which have dwelled here, the spirit felt in its numerous young and hospitable people and its architecture. This university centre of the region has always been and has remained as the city of the bridges and the youth. (Herzegovina-Neretva Canton, 2014).
Such text emphasizes the diversity of Mostar and underlines the importance of bridges and youth in the city’s culture.
Multiculturalism is supported not only by the Old Bridge's architectural design, but also by the narration of its history as embracing and integrating. Although Old Bridge was built in 1566 during the Ottoman era, the existence of the bridge at the same location in medieval ages is
145
documented in line with recent archeological findings (Popovac, 2006). This inseparable connection to the past can be observed, for example, in the Museum of Old Bridge, which opened in 2006 to celebrate the second anniversary of the reconstruction. The museum, inside the Tara Tower, has displays, inside the Tara Tower, of the archeological remnants of the two wooden bridges found during the reconstruction project. The existence of older medieval bridges prior to Old Bridge is also raised by UNESCO and defined as an indication of "the strong historical and functional integrity as well as the ability of architects and town planners to integrate new development principles and architecture with the earlier medieval era" (UNESCO, 2010).
But perhaps most interesting is how history is selectively presented—though selected differently by different agencies—to support the theme of multiculturalism. On the historical background of Old Bridge, tourism brochures by the Herzegovina-Neretva Canton Tourist Board denote that the history of Old Bridge dates back to Middle Ages. Then they refer to historical evidence that life in Mostar has continued since pre-historic times. Although official tourism documents maintain that Old Bridge was built in 1566, they fail to mention that it was built under Ottoman rule. It is interesting that the same brochure refers to the Ottoman period when describing a Dervish house built in Blagaj city and a fortress built in Pocitelj as a defense against the Ottomans. In Mostar, different groups might have different orientations to the past, which is likely to create diverse if not conflicting narratives of the past. My analysis found that, in order to be more inclusive and sensitive, different authorities and sources avoid particular time periods when talking about the Old Bridge.
I do not argue that there is an official attempt to demolish Ottoman history per se, but it can certainly be interpreted as a narration tactic. Avoiding, if not omitting, Ottoman connections
146
with Old Bridge is part of narrating act or tactic used by some to represent Old Bridge as a more diverse place and to underline its multicultural status. Such an attempt to disconnect Old Bridge from Ottoman history helps in embracing all residents from diverse ethnicities, and minimizes the wounds of the Bosnian War, so that Mostar as a multicultural city can be further supported.
Similar narration tactics have been applied regarding the bitter days of the Bosnian War by failing to mention how Old Bridge was demolished. Through such narration tactics, again, the past of Mostar can be reframed, and Old Bridge and Mostar can stand firmly as multicultural entities, to promote tourism and preserve peace and stability in the city.
Alternatively, promotional brochures from the Tourism Association of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina emphasize the Ottoman history of Old Bridge. Yet they refrain from referring to the destruction of the bridge during the Bosnian War. In these, Old Bridge is defined as "one of the greatest architectural achievements in the Ottoman controlled Balkans" (BH Tourism, 2014). Moreover, "This single-arch stone bridge is an exact replica of the original bridge that stood for over 400 years and that was designed by Hajrudin, a student of the great Ottoman architect Sinan." Strikingly, this brochure indirectly explains that this is the newly built Old Bridge without mentioning the demolition of Old Bridge after standing 400 years. The text prefers to embrace connecting aspects of the bridge and neglects divisions in Mostar: "Crossing from the west bank to the east you'll also be crossing the ancient point where East and West symbolically met."
These texts emphasize the peaceful days in Mostar in order to create a multicultural identity for the city, to attract global tourism and investment, and to be inclusive of all residents. To achieve such goals, they thus apply a selective past—some avoid the Ottoman era, while others refrain from talking about Bosnian-war era. There exists the ideal past, when life, city, and
147
all identities lived peacefully together. Accordingly, Old Bridge turned from the bridge dividing Croatian side from Bosnian side into a bridge connecting them, effectively making Mostar a "multicultural city" and Old Bridge a "symbol of multiculturalism." In a sense, global authorities attempt to continue peace building in Bosnia and Herzegovina through place-making and place-branding strategies. Multiculturalism is presented as a naturalizing discourse presented by international organizations and local tourism authorities through various media and texts, to create and strengthen dialogue among the multiple and ever-changing identities already present in Mostar.
As international organizations endeavor to promote multiculturalism without imposing any dominant identity, how do residents of Mostar view those representations and interpret multiculturalism? Do all residents accept the dominant discourse on Old Bridge? How do residents describe Old Bridge and their identities? Is Old Bridge a symbolic space where diverse identities connect or conflict? These are important questions to consider in understanding what extent dominant global discourse is echoed in the hearts and minds of locals in Mostar. Locals’ narratives shed light on how multiculturalist policies of international organizations resonate in the society. In considering the question during fieldwork, there appeared to be some contradiction in the narratives regarding the presence of multiculturalism in Mostar.
A handful of residents acknowledged the multicultural character of Mostar throughout its history. They did not view multiculturalism as a concept imported by international organizations, even though the focus on Mostar's multicultural character is similarly emphasized by state and international organizations. For these residents, Mostar has always been naturally multicultural. Likewise, scholars (Gellner, 1997; Mazower, 2000; Todorova, 2009) regard two imperial legacies—the Ottoman and the Habsburg—as influential factors in creating a heterogeneous
148
region where multiple ethnic, cultural and religious identities coexist. Furthermore, during the Yugoslav era, in line with Tito's economic and urbanization policies, Bosnian cities including Mostar acted as a melting pot where ethnic differences were eroded and mixed marriages increased among diverse groups (Donia & Fine, 2004).
Yet residents have accepted that the multicultural character was brought to a halt during the war. For instance, Hamdija, a Bosniak tour guide, said that Croats not only destroyed the bridge but also the connection between the two sides. Hamdija claims that they tried to kill the tradition of multiculturalism in the city. Likewise, Ivan, who serves as the vice-president of a political party’s youth organization, reiterates that "if you take multiculturalism away, you kill the city of Mostar." Emphasizing the multicultural character of Mostar in terms of history, Ivan spoke about how different cultures lived together peacefully. Although current statistics concerning interethnic marriages are not available, Mostar has been known for its mixed marriages, particularly during the Yugoslav era. Ivan, the "real Mostarian," says that he is a child of mixed marriage, having a Bosniak mother, a Croat father and Serb cousins. Ivan says that all his family members believe in multiculturalism. He adds that if they all had nationalistic beliefs their family would have fallen apart a long time ago. Ivan spoke about how some mixed marriages could not survive during the Bosnian War as partners supported their ethnic brethren.
Although supportive of a multicultural Mostar, some residents that I spoke with took little notice of the multicultural character of Old Bridge. For instance, Lamija spoke about Old Bridge as the symbol only of Bosniak culture. Likewise, Nadija recalls that Croats do not view the bridge as a part of their culture. She notes that there are Croats from the western side who never saw the bridge, despite UNESCO’s decision.
149
A few Bosniak residents elaborated general statements about Croats’ views of Old Bridge. For example, Armin, a Bosniak student, declares that Croats have also gradually started to acknowledge the symbolic value of the Old Bridge for Mostar. Yet some Croat residents warned that it would take time to view Old Bridge as the symbol of multiculturalism. Dragana, a Croat journalism student, spoke of the reluctance of older generations to forget the history of war. Complaining that older people in Mostar are not open to new things, Dragana says her grandmother still warns her not to cross to the Bosniak side because she thinks it is dangerous there. Moreover, it is not only Dragana's grandmother who remembers the past; there are also Bosniaks under the influence of memory politics. At the steps of Old Bridge, there is a stone on which is written "Never Forget," standing as an ever-present reminder of the Bosnian War both for the locals and tourists as they cross the Old Bridge(see Appendix J).
Some residents, like Jasmina, a Bosniak sales assistant, argue that Old Bridge cannot be multicultural since the bridge mainly connects two cultures, Croats and Bosniaks. Yet Jasmina adds that, before the Bosnian War, Old Bridge connected three different cultures. Indeed, Mostar today is largely a Bosniak-Croat city despite the fact that Serbs who migrated to the Serb-dominated parts of the country during the war have recently started to return to the city.
More pessimistic views were also observed. Adela, a Bosniak shop manager, clarifies that Old Bridge does not really connect the two sides, considering the enduring gap between Bosniaks and Croats. She notes that Old Bridge is an ordinary bridge, not the symbol of multiculturalism that Mostarians see every day. Likewise, Marija asserts that multiculturalism is not going to work in Mostar because "when a child is born here, a hatred is put inside him." Despite the efforts of international organizations, Marija says each side cannot see the other as normal.
150
Appadurai (1996) relates the popularity and spread of multiculturalism to the failure of nation-states in dealing with minority groups, a view that may explain some residents' feeling about multiculturalism. There were strong opponents of multiculturalism among the locals that I spoke with from both sides in Mostar. Josip, a Croat priest, was furious when I asked him about multiculturalism. Josip raised his voice angrily, calling multiculturalism a utopia. Saying he does not believe in multiculturalism, Josip further declares that this is just an American ideal. Josip maintains that "Old Bridge cannot represent multiculturalism" and furthermore refused to answer my follow-up questions, abruptly terminating our interview. His refusal to continue the interview seems a clear protest, not so much against me, but against the notion of multiculturalism.
Similarly, Ivan describes multiculturalism as a utopia. International organizations come to Mostar, receive funding and deliver speeches on multiculturalism. Despite such efforts, says Ivan, "if people in Mostar want to start a war tomorrow, they will." Isa, the middle-aged Bosniak shop owner, maintains that two million Bosniaks are tired of hearing the multiculturalism "fairytale." Isa asks a few questions: "Who will explain why people were killed? Who will explain why our cultural heritage was destroyed?" For him, the destruction of cultural heritage was "the product of the Croat Church, not the Bible." Isa adds that Mostarians should read every Holy book including the Quran, the Bible, and the Talmud, so peace can endure.
There are several international organizations that keep multicultural education projects in their agenda in Mostar. My interviews with professionals, including Elvir Djuliman, Director of Nansen Dialogue Center, and Aida Maric, Education Officer at OSCE Mostar Office, indicate that the efforts of those organizations to promote multiculturalism, particularly in the field of education, seem to have continued ambitiously. Yet there is further room for improvement as education is still ethnically divided in Mostar. For instance, Djuliman mentions the existence of a
151
"two schools under one roof" principle in Mostar, as secondary schools students follow two different curriculums, with each ethnic group learning subjects such as history, religion and geography differently. Although this system allows Bosniak and Croat pupils to attend the same school, they become more alienated from each other as BiH still does not have a unified national education curriculum.
During the interview, the OSCE Mostar Office staff mentioned that each year they organize a fair, which 22 secondary schools attend. They also talked about their intercultural education projects aimed at 5th-8th grade kids, to teach about diversity and tolerance. OSCE Mostar Office also has projects and workshops aimed at bringing school directors together in order to encourage all religious feasts to celebrate together. OSCE staff praised their projects as having visible outcomes. Aida Maric emphasizes that students who have attended their projects have started to emphasize the similarities between the two groups rather than the differences. Furthermore, Meri Musa, Press Officer from OSCE Mostar, mentioned their efforts to include International Day of Tolerance systematically in the school curriculum, with the help of the Ministry of Education.
Multiculturalism can be an ideal, whether endorsed by international organizations or by individuals. It can manifest as a political agenda, a cultural ideal, an economic incentive, and an educational enterprise. It is also a practice to be realized in local residents' day-to-day activities, and at the same time is grounded in their unique sociohistorical experiences that give rise to their idiosyncratic sense of identity. Further complicating the situation is the intersection with issues of power and politics, as well as economic and tangible gains. In responding to the need, or the call, for multiculturalism, on a site with historical significance that is also a tourist locale, each respondent invokes specific images and evaluations, and attaches particular emotions from their
152
experiences, as they negotiate their identities with the cultural other—or others—in assigning meanings to Old Bridge. Their accounts may not be coherent, but it is in these irregularly presented narratives that globalization enters into the life of the individual resident of Mostar.
153
VI. CONCLUSION
In this study, I exploredglobal and local meanings and significance of Old Bridge and to what extent its representation differs from practice. Bakhtin’s dialogical narration theory provided the lens through which I understood Old Bridge’s meanings for locals. Because of the diversity of people and views, both past and present, Old Bridge is continuously narrated not dialectically but dialogically as each interviewee—and their predecessors as well—unintentionally respond to others' claims while talking about Old Bridge, and by doing so, participate in the construction and reconstruction of discourse in co-creating realities.
A. Summary
Although Mostar is still divided in terms of economic, cultural, and political institutions, its residents remain connected and attached to the Old Bridge to varying degrees, each with their own emotional intensity, sense of historicity, and cultural identity, in the pursuit of their daily lives in situ.
While focusing on decoding space, Lefebvre (1991) points out the existence of "...specific codes, established at specific historical periods and varying in their effects" (p. 17). In Mostar's case, we see that not only Old Bridge but this coded system collapsed during the Bosnian War. Should the emphasis of UNESCO and other international organizations on multiculturalism be regarded as an attempt to reconstruct the specific code existing in prewar Mostar? Is it possible to create a code for Old Bridge that can be shared by all groups in Mostar, including Croats, Bosnians and Serbs? Those were the background questions I took into the field during my research.
International authorities and organizations, whether in the form of OHR or UNESCO, aimed to construct an image of a multicultural Mostar using the Old Bridge, as it represents "an
154
exceptional and universal symbol of coexistence of communities from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds" (UNESCO, 2010). In doing so, they try to overshadow the bitter memories of the Bosnian War and the destruction of Old Bridge. Yet the "Don’t forget, 93" is not only carved on the tiny stone standing on the Old Bridge, but also inscribed in the minds of Bosniaks, and Croats avoiding visiting Old Bridge present a completely different image for Mostar than the dominant global ordering.
Simply put, the Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism is more influential at the global level than the local level. While officials and global authorities consistently refer to Old Bridge as a symbol for multiculturalism, locals challenge such dominant ordering and imaginings of Old Bridge through alternative narratives. In encountering day-to-day existence with others, more positively, some residents view multiculturalism as more an ideal than a reality, and a goal to work toward than a portrait of the current situation, with its path is full of challenges and uncertainty; more negatively, some residents view multiculturalism as merely political rhetoric likely to be unsuccessful.
On Old Bridge, multiple realms of public space, including cultural, economic, and social everyday space exist together. Allowing the voices of locals to speak about Old Bridge and also exploring the various texts promulgated by various institutions, I explored how groups living in Mostar dialogically narrate the past, the present and the future of Old Bridge vis-à-vis discourse engaged by global/international institutions, which in turn has become an important part of their lives.
Two major themes emerged after analysis, which I have labeled public space and globalization. My research found that social constructions of public space differ in line with residents' identities. Social uses of Old Bridge change enormously depending on the age,
155
ethnicity and employment status of the residents. While Bosniaks use the bridge as part of their daily routine, most of the Croats tend to avoid Old Bridge unless they are hosting a foreign visitor. Croat interviewees mentioned several reasons to avoid the bridge but mainly it is because it is "touristy" and crowded, as well as a far route for them.Croat residents, particularly those who live on the western side and far away from the bridge, do not often visit the Old Bridge unless they have visitors in town.
My fieldwork also shows that residents' use of Old Bridge is highly influenced by the family cultures. Families introduce their assumptions and prejudices to the younger generation, which in turn affects their use of public space. This observation becomes evident when we compare Croats and Bosniaks. Croats usually do not feel a sense of belonging to the Old Bridge. In the daily experience of Croat residents, Old Bridge does not stand as a public space that they use to navigate back and forth. On the contrary, Bosniak residents are more contained in this specific public space which simultaneously acts as a workplace and social space, a focus that is reinforced through family tellings about the evolution of the Bridge.
Old Bridge, once a space of opposition and even military conflict, still stands as a spatial boundary as different age and ethnic groups, each with their distinct identities, define the meaning of Old Bridge as a public space. Spatial division of Mostar was confirmed by most of the residents, both Bosniaks and Croats, that I spoke with. Croats have difficulty identifying themselves with Ottoman history and are less attached to the Old Bridge. For Bosniaks, Old Bridge is their own cultural space reminding them of the Ottoman era and making them feel secure. Its loss during Bosnian War prompts them to remember the risk of their extermination in Bosnia and Herzegovina—a threat still felt today. In reproducing the Ottoman era's spatial practices such as jumping from Old Bridge, and by sharing and telling legends about the Old
156
Bridge from generation to generation, Bosniak citizens imagine the past through memories and reassert their cultural identity.
Locals also well recognize the divided Mostar in at least three different ways. The economic development gaps between east and west Mostar is physically reinforced by Neretva River as a geographical border separating eastern from western Mostar. Nonetheless, many view the real barrier as the mental division created and strengthened by the older generations' narratives, politicians' rhetoric, and media images. Mostar might be an integrated city if such divisive forces can be weakened.
I also explored how globalization affects public space and locals, and how locals' narratives of public space differ from those of global authorities, including state and international organizations. It is obvious that there is a strong resentment expressed by both younger and older generations of Mostar residents toward international authorities and organizations. Interviewees often used the terms "international organizations" and "international community" interchangeably when I questioned their interpretations of globalization. However, they named mostly specific international organizations such as OHR, UNESCO and OSCE when they were referring to organizational bodies who made decisions affecting Mostar. For them, not only could international organizations not play an influential and preventative role during the Bosnian War, their current policies are also inactive or ineffective.
Under the dominant—and also prescribed—image of Mostar being a "multicultural" city, most of these international organizations and non-governmental organizations have organized focus group activities to promote multicultural dialogue and reconciliation. A handful of residents I interviewed regularly attend the activities organized by nongovernmental organizations. Yet the composition and character of these events were mostly criticized for their
157
limited outreach to all Mostar residents. International organizations also have been criticized for excluding older-generation citizens and politicians from their activities. Moreover, the decisions of international organizations have usually been found to be uninformed and ineffective by Mostar residents.
In considering my question on the impact of UNESCO’s decision to add Old Bridge to the World Heritage List, there were mixed interpretations. Generally, the residents that I interviewed describe this as a positive step for reconciliation in Mostar. A handful of residents from both sides find the decision beneficial for tourism and promoting Mostar. Although praising UNESCO’s decision, however, most of the interviewees also criticized UNESCO for the organization's inability to provide further inspection and protection for Old Bridge and its surroundings.
In discussing the current role of international organizations, every resident that I spoke with mentioned OHR. Considering the special status of OHR and its extraordinary powers, OHR has been the most resented of international organizations within the community. A few interviewees likened the role of current international organizations to the empires that ruled Bosnia and Herzegovina in the past, including the Ottoman Empire and the Austria-Hungarian Empire. There seems to be an impression among Mostar residents that the international organizations have replaced the empires in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
As for tourism, all of my interviewees unanimously acknowledged the positive impact of Old Bridge in attracting tourists to Mostar, highlighting UNESCO’s decision as a reason for the increased number of tourists coming to Mostar. While both Croat and Bosniak residents acknowledge the benefits of tourism for Mostar, however, they also criticize city officials for failing in their efforts to employ city branding, supply tourism infrastructure and regulate tourism
158
efficiently. Currently, tourism is seen as the only economic source for the development of city. Yet the volume of tourists affects the locals' daily use of the bridge and even inadvertently excludes locals from the public space. Old Bridge has been transformed into a workplace for shop and restaurant owners, one that is frequently used by tourists. This situation alienates some residents from the Old Bridge.
Interestingly, representation of Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism is more prominent at the global level than the local level. While officials and global authorities eagerly endorse such a symbol, locals' narratives challenge this dominant ordering in imagining the Old Bridge. There were strong opponents of the multiculturalism concept among the locals I spoke with from both sides of Mostar, and only a handful of residents acknowledged the multicultural character of Mostar. They also disagreed that multiculturalism is a concept brought by international organizations; for them, Mostar has always been multicultural naturally but its multicultural character was brought to a halt during the war.
B. Limitations
My study has been affected by the limitations of qualitative research. As in any field study, my research is limited to the people I was able to interview and the settings I was able to observe, as well as who I am as a researcher and also participant. My access to Croat residents was relatively limited, given the nature of user population in and around the Old Bridge area. Therefore, I was not able to develop a key informant relationship with a Croat resident. On the other hand, I was able to develop strong relationships with Bosniak interviewees which helped me to gain further access to the Bosniak community. Of course, my access to the Bosniaks also has something to do with my Turkish background.
159
Furthermore, interviewing professionals working at international organizations was a challenge. Non-resident professional interviewees declined to answer proposed questions and preferred to talk about their organizations' projects. I still conducted interviews to gather supplementary data, but I wonder what responses they would have provided had they agreed to talk about these questions, especially how their narration may be compared against the official discourse surrounding the World Heritage Site. Of course, the fact that they did not feel comfortable answering my proposed questions is revealing. A good qualitative research notices not only what is there in the field but also what is hidden and not immediately observable.
There were moments in the field where I felt like an outsider in terms of nationality. Being both a female from Turkey—a Muslim country—and a researcher in an American university created a paradox in the field. Particularly, my Turkish citizenship played a dual role. Although being a Turkish citizen eased my access to the Bosniak community, it created a glass wall while interviewing Croats. Some potential Croat participants declined to be interviewed after hearing that I am from Turkey. Also, I felt that some Croat interviewees were more cautious and stressful when interviewing with a Turkish citizen. Some potential Bosniak participants declined to interview after hearing that I am a researcher in an American university. There was one incident where a potential participant thought that I worked for the United States government. Details of this incident were explained in Chapter 3.
Even with those I was able to interview, the fact that my interviews were conducted in English also imposed limitations. As so much about cultural meaning and significance are encapsulated in language, such as in the metaphors used and ways of expressions, I know I am likely to have missed some cultural intricacies that can only be communicated in the local
160
language; this is especially true in a divided city where multiple languages are used by people of different ethnicities.
Finally, my research has been conducted via several trips. Though I was able to capture Mostar at different times and was able to talk to different people incrementally, thus keeping a good balance between being an observer and a participant, results may have been quite different if I were to have stayed for a long time and thoroughly immersed myself in the culture. Knowing that research about culture can never be "finished," I am aware of the limitations of this study.
C. Future Research
Recently, there has been a turn toward researching socio-spatial practices in public spaces through focusing on the everyday activities and experiences of users. However, these studies mostly focus on global cities which have been transformed in line with the increase of migrant populations. Much research remains to be done with respect to public spaces in ethnically and religiously mixed post-war cities.
Studies of public space require an interdisciplinary approach focusing on political, cultural and economic aspects of public space. As a communication scholar, I have focused this study on the narratives of individuals using the public space. In future research, Old Bridge's role as a public space in providing investment, employment and income may be further explored to shed light on how increasing the tourism income of Mostar city redefines people's negotiation of their day-to-day living in a world heritage site, as these two sets of meanings—cultural and historical, and commercial and economic—may be in conflict with each other.
Another valuable approach would be to interview tourists visiting Old Bridge to gain an in-depth understanding of their viewpoints. Tourists, although temporary and transient visitors to Mostar, are an essential part of Mostar, not only in day-to-day activities (especially during high
161
volume tourist seasons), but also in the construction of meanings of Mostar as a World Heritage Site and as a multicultural city. Several questions for further research can be posed. How would tourists define Old Bridge as a public space? Do they view Old Bridge as a multicultural space or not? How does a divided city resonate with tourists' understanding of a carefully selected and officially sanctioned World Heritage Site? How does tourists' consumption of the Old Bridge and Mostar continue to shape locals' sense of identity? In addition to interviewing tourists, travel blogs written by travelers and the photos they have chosen to post could also be a good source for analysis to understand how Old Bridge is represented digitally.
Finally, while Mostar is one of many examples of a spatially divided city in our globalized world, there are other ethnically and religiously divided cities, including Belfast, Beirut, Jerusalem, Nicosia, and recently Aleppo. A comparative study, though its focus would be different from an in-depth study of a specific city, would be beneficial in understanding how public space is narrated with respect to different ethnic, religious and national identities in divided cities. As a site for identity negotiation by locals in responding to global discourse, my analysis of Old Bridge represents a small but important step.
162
REFERENCES
Albrow, M. (2008). Travelling beyond local cultures. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The
globalization reader (3rd ed.)(pp. 135-143). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Altman, I., & Low, S. (1992). Place attachment. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities. London: Verso.
Andrić, I. (2009). The bridge on the Drina. Beograd, Serbia: Dereta.
Anholt-GfK Roper (2009). Nation Brands Index. Retrieved from http://www.gfkamerica.com/practice_areas/roper_pam/nbi_index/index.en.html/
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. (J. Howe, Trans.). London: Verso.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (pp.259-422)(C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press (Original work published 1975).
Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics (C. Emerson, Ed. & Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1929).
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres & other late essays (pp. 60-102). (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. (Original published in 1979).
Bakhtin, M. M. (1990). Art and answerability: Early philosophical essays M. Holquist & V. Liapunov (Eds.). (V. Liapunov, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Banac, I. (1988). The national question in Yugoslavia: Origins, history, politics. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.
Barber, B. R. (1995). Jihad vs. McWorld. New York, NY: Times Books.
Barkawi, T. (2017). War and world politics. In J. Baylis, S. Smith, & P. Owens (Eds.),
The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations (7th ed.)
(pp. 223-238). New York, N.Y: Oxford University Press.
Baudrillard, J. (1988). Selected writings. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
163
Baxter, L. A., & Braithwaite, D. O. (2006). Introduction. In D. O. Braithwaite & L. A. Baxter (Eds.), Engaging theories in family communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 1-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Baylis, J. (2017). International and global security. In J. Baylis, S. Smith, & P. Owens (Eds.), The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations (7th ed.) (pp. 238-253). New York, N.Y: Oxford University Press.
Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owens, P. (2017). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to
international relations (7th ed.). New York, N.Y: Oxford University Press.
Beall, J., Crankshaw, O. & Parnell, S. (2002). Uniting a divided city: Governance and social exclusion in Johannesburg. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Bhabba, H. (1990). Nation and narration. London: Routledge.
Bhabba, H. (1994). The place of culture. London: Routledge.
BH Tourism. (2014). What to see and do. Retrieved from
http://www.bhtourism.ba/eng/whattoseeanddo.wbsp?wbf_mjesto=;2
Bialostosky, D. H. (1986). Dialogics as an art of discourse in literary criticism, PMLA, 101(5), 788-797.
Bildt, C. (February 22, 2017). Restoring Faith in Globalization. Globe and mail (Toronto). Retrieved fromhttps://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/restoring-faith-in-globalization/article34098977/
Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brubaker, R. (2006). Ethnicity without groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, E. M., & Gorfain, P. (1984). Dialogic narration and the paradoxes of Masada. In E.M. Bruner (Ed.), Text, play and story (pp. 56-79). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Calame, J., & Charlesworth, E. (2009). Divided cities: Belfast, Beirut, Jerusalem, Mostar, and
Nicosia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
164
Carey, J. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. New York, NY: Routledge.
Carmona, M. et al. (2008). Public space: The management dimension. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. G., & Stone, A. M. (1992). Public space. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Castells, M. (1983). The city and the grassroots. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwel Publishing.
Castells, M. (2004). The power of identity (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Cvetkovich, A. & Kellner, D. (1997). Introduction: Thinking global and local. In A. Cvetkovich & D. Kellner (Eds.), Articulating the global and local: Globalization and cultural studies (pp. 1-30). Boulder, CO: Westview.
Corey, F. C. (1996). Personal narratives of young men in prison: Labeling the outside inside. Western Journal of Communication, 60, 57-75.
Cowen, T. (2002). Creative destruction: How globalization is changing the world’s cultures. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Crang, Philip. (1997). Performing the tourist product. In C. Rojek & J. Urry (Eds.), Touring
cultures: transformations of travel and theory, (pp. 137-154). Routledge, New York.
Crang, Mike. (2004). Cultural geographies of tourism. In A. A. Lew, C. M. Hall, and A. M.
Williams (Eds.), A companion to tourism, (pp. 74-84). Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
de Certau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Denzin N., & Lincoln Y. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage Publication Inc.
Dirlik, A. (1999). Place-based imagination: Globalism and the politics of place. Journal of Fernand Braudel Center, 22, 151-187.
Djurasovic, A. (2016). Ideology, political transitions and the city: the case of Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina. New York: Routledge.
165
Donais, T. (2005). The Political Economy of Peace-Building in Post-Dayton Bosnia. New York:
Routledge.
Donia, R. J., & Fine, J.V.A. Jr. (1994). Bosnia and Hercegovina: A tradition betrayed. London: Hurst & Company.
Donia, R. J. (2009). Sarajevo: A biography. London: Hurst & Company.
Duncan, J. S. (1990). The city as text: The politics of landscape interpretation in the Kanyan Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
Fairclough, N. (2000). Critical analysis of media discourse. In P. Marris & S. Thornham (Eds.), Media studies: A reader (pp. 308-325) (2nd ed.). New York, NY: New York University Press.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fan, Y. (2006). Branding the nation: What is being branded? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12, 5-14. Retrieved from http://jvm.sagepub.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/cgi/content/abstract/12/1/5
Faroqhi, S. (2007). The Ottoman Empire and the world around it. New York, NY: I.B.Tauris& Co. Ltd.
Federation of Bosnia Herzegovina Office of Statistics (2009). Population of Mostar. Retrieved from http://www.fzs.ba/Dem/Popis/Nacionalnost%20opcine%20Popis%201991.pdf
Fisk, R. (1994, June 19). Following the devil`s track [The Sunday Review]. The Independent, p. 4.
Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish. New York, NY: Random House.
Foucault, M. (1982). Power/Knowledge. New York, NY: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. (1984, October). Of other spaces. Architecture/Mouvement/Continuite, 5, 46-49.
Fukuyama, F. (1989). The end of history? The National Interest, 16, 3-18.
Gellner, E. (1997). Nationalism. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
166
Giddens, A. (2002). Runaway world: How globalization is reshaping our lives. London: Profile
Books.
Gilmore, F. (2002). A country - can it be repositioned? - Spain the success story of country branding. Journal of Brand Management,9, 281-293. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/pqdweb?did=826458091&sid=2&Fmt=1&clientId=8224&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Golledge, R. G. & Stimson, R.J. (1997). Spatial behavior: A geographic perspective. New York,NY: Guilford Press.
Goodman, H. (2001). In-depth interviews. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (pp. 309–19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Grodach, C. (2002). Reconstituting identity and history in post-war Mostar, Bosnia-Herzegovina. City, 6(1), 61-82.
Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1992). Beyond "culture": Space, identity, and the politics of difference. Cultural Anthropology, 7(1), 6-23.
Halilovich, H. (2013). Places of pain: Forced displacement, popular memory and trans-local
identities in Bosnian War-torn Communities. NY: Berghahn Books.
Hanioğlu, M. Ş. (2008). A brief history of the late Ottoman Empire. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Harvey, D. (1985). Consciousness and the urban experience. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Harvey, D. (1995). Globalization in question. Rethinking Marxism, 8, 1-17.
Harvey, D. (2006). The political economy of public space. In S. Low & N. Smith (Eds.), Thepolitics of public space (pp. 17-34). New York, NY: Routledge.
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Global transformations: Politics, economics and culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Held, D., & McGrew, A. (2000). The great globalization debate. In D. Held & A. McGrew
(Eds.), The global transformations reader: An introduction to the globalization debate
(pp. 1-45). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Herbert, S. (2000). For ethnography. Progress in Human Geography, 24(4), 550-568.
167
Hernández-García, J. (2013). Public space in informal settlements: The Barrios of Bogotá. Newscastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hillier, B., & Vaughan, L. (2007). The city as one thing. Progress in Planning, 67(3), 205-230.
Hirst, P. (1997, July). The global economy: Myths and realities. International Affairs, 73(3), 409-425.
Hirst, D., & Thompson, G. (2000). Globalization – A necessary myth? In D. Held & A. McGrew (Eds.), The global transformations reader: An introduction to the globalization debate (pp. 68-75). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hopper, P. (2007). Understanding cultural globalization. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Hurrell, A. (2017). The rising powers and the emerging global order. In J. Baylis, S. Smith, & P.
Owens (Eds.), The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international
relations (7th ed.) (pp. 83-100). New York, N.Y: Oxford University Press.
Hyndman, J. (2001). The field is here and now, not there and then. The Geographical Review
91(1-2), 262-272.
Imber, C. (2002). The Ottoman Empire, 1300-1650: The structure of power. New York, NY:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Inalcik, H. (2000). The Ottoman Empire: The classical age 1300-1600. London: Phoenix.
Inglehart, R., &Norris, P. (July 29, 2016). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash. HKS Working Paper. No. RWP16-026. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2818659
Iriye, A. (2002). Global community: The role of international organizations in the making of the contemporary world. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Irr, C. (2008). World heritage sites and the concept of the commons. In L. Pauly & W. Coleman (Eds.), Global ordering: Institutions and autonomy in a changing world (pp. 85-105). Vancouver: UBC Press.
Jameson, F. (1984). Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. New Left Review,146, 53-92.
Jameson, F. (1999). Notes on globalization as a philosophical note. In F. Jameson & M. Miyoshi (Eds.), The cultures of globalization (pp. 55-77). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
168
Joachim, J. (2017). NGOs in world politics. In J. Baylis, S. Smith, & P. Owens (Eds.), The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations (7th ed.) (pp.
347-363). New York, N.Y: Oxford University Press.
Judith, M., & Nakayama, T. (2010). Intercultural Communication in Contexts (5th ed). CA:
McGraw Hill.
Kaplan, C. (1987). Deterritorializations: The rewriting of home and exile in Western feminist discourse. Cultural Critique,6, 187-198.
Katriel, T. (1994). Sites of memory: Discourses of the past in Israeli pioneering settlement
museums. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 80(1), 1-20.
Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (2000). Globalization: What’s new? What’s not? (and so what?). Foreign Policy, 118, 104-119.
King, A. B. (Ed.) (1997). Culture, globalization and the world system: Contemporary conditions for the representation of identity. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
King, A. D. (1980). Buildings and society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Klein, N. (1999). No logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies. New York, NY: Picador.
Kostogriz, A. (2005). Dialogical imagination of (inter)cultural spaces: Rethinking the semiotic ecology of second language and literacy learning. In J. K. Hall, G. Vitanova, & L. Marchenkova (Eds.), Dialogue with Bakhtin on second and foreign language learning: New perspectives (pp. 189-211). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kotler, P. & Gertner, D. (2002). Country as brand, product, and beyond: A place marketing and brand management perspective. Journal ofBrand Management, 9, 249-261.
Langellier, K. M. (1989). Personal narratives: Perspectives on theory and research. Text and Performance Quarterly, 9, 243-276.
Lawrence, D. & Low, S. M. (1990). The built environment and spatial form. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 453-505.
Lechner, F. J., & Boli, J. (Eds). (2008). The globalization reader (3rd ed.).Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Leech, P. (September 30, 2014). Globalization and the fight against ISIS. Middle East Monitor.
Retrieved from https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20140930-globalisation-and-the-
fight-against-isis/
Lefebvre, H. (1997). The production of space. New York, NY: Blackwell.
169
Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lotman, Y. M. (1988). Text within a text. Soviet Psychology,26(3), 32-51.
Lotman, Y. M. (1990). Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Low, S.M. (1996, November). Spatializing culture: The social production and social construction of public space in Costa Rica. American Ethnologist, 23(4), 861-879.
Low, S.M. (2000). On the plaza: The politics of public space and culture. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Mahbubani, K. (2013). The great convergence: Asia, the West, and the logic of one world. New
York: Public Affairs.
Makas, E. G. (2007). Representing competing identities: Building and rebuilding in post-war Mostar. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cornell University, New York.
Malcolm, N. (2002). Bosnia: A short history. London: Pan Books.
Mazower, M. (2002). The Balkans: A short history. New York, NY: Modern Library.
Merriman, S.B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M.Y., Kee, Y., Ntseane, G., & Muhamad, M. (2001, September-October). Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 29, 405-416.
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state, American Journal of Sociology, 103, 141-181.
Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Mitchell, D. (2003). The right to the city. New York: The Guilford Press.
Mitrovic, J. (2008). Bridging the divides- "Unifications" of Mostar. (Unpublished master'sthesis). Nationalism Studies Program, Central European University, Hungary.
Mojzes, P. (Ed.). (1998). Religion and the war in Bosnia. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.
Morgan, P., & R. Pride (Eds.). (2002). Destination branding. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Mostar airport. (2017). Mostar airport company profile. Retrieved from
http://mostar-airport.ba/download/Company%20Profile%20ZL%20Mostar%20ENG_F.pdf
170
Muecke, M. A. (1994). On evaluation of ethnographies. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Critical Issues in
Qualitative Research (pp. 187-209). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
Myers, D. J. (1997). Latin American cities. Latin American Research Review,32, 109-123.
Nielsen, G. M. (1987). Reading the Quebec imaginary: Marcel Rioux and dialogical form. The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 12(1/2), 134-149.
Office of the High Representative. (2010). General information. Retrieved from http://www.ohr.int/ohr-info/gen-info/default.asp?content_id=38519
Office of the High Representative. (2014). Mandate. Retrieved from http://www.ohr.int/?page_id=1161
Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation state: The rise of regional economies. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Ohmae, K. (2008). The end of the nation state. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.)(pp. 223-228). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Olins, W. (2002). Branding the nation – the historical context. Journal of Brand Management, 9, 241-248.
Palmberger, M. (2016). How generations remember: Conflicting histories, shared memories in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pašić, A. (2006). The old bridge in Mostar. Gračanica, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Grin.
Perry, D. (2003). Urban tourism and the privatizing discourses of public infrastructure. In D. Judd (Ed.), The infrastructure of play: Building the tourist city (pp.19-50). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Popovac, M. (2006). Reconstruction of the Old Bridge of Mostar, Acta Polytechnica, 46(2), 50-59.
Quinn, N., & Holland, E. (1987). Culture and cognition. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.),
Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 3-40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rapaport, A. (1982). The meaning of built environment: A nonverbal communication approach. Arizona, TX: The University of Arizona Press.
Rapley, J. (2004). Globalization and inequality: Neoliberalism`s downward spiral. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.
171
Richardson, M. (1982). Being-in-the-market versus being-in-the-plaza: Material culture and the construction of social reality in Spanish America. American Ethnologist, 9, 421-436.
Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage.
Robertson, R. (1997). Social theory, cultural relativity and the problem of globality. In A. B. King (Ed.), Culture, globalization and the world system: Contemporary conditions for the representation of identity (pp. 69-91). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Robertson, R. (2008). Globalization as a problem. In Lechner, F. J., & Boli, J. (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.)(pp. 87-95). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Robertson, R., & Khondker, H. (1998). Discourses of globalization: Preliminary considerations. International Sociology, 13, 25-40
Rojecki, A. (2002). Modernism, state sovereignty and dissent: Media and the new post-cold war movements. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 19(2), 152-171.
Rosenau, J. N. (1990). Turbulence in world politics. Brighton, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York, NY: Pantheon.
Sanders, C. R. (1980). Rope burns: Impediments to the achievement of basic comfort early in the field research experience. In W. B. Shaffir, R. A. Stebbins & A. Turowetz (Eds.), Fieldwork experience: Qualitative approaches to social research (pp. 158–70). New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.
Sassen, S. (1991). The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Scholte, J. A. (1993). International relations of social change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Schuman, M. A. (2004). Nations in transition: Bosnia and Herzegovina. New York, NY: Facts on File, Inc.
Scuira, L. (2017). Brexit beyond borders: Beginning of the EU collapse and return to nationalism. Journal of International Affairs, 70(2), 109-123.
Sen, A. (2006). Identity and violence: The illusion of destiny. New York, NY: Norton.
172
Sen, A. (2008). How to judge globalism. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.)(pp. 19-25). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Silber, L., & Little, A. (1997). The death of Yugoslavia. London: Penguin Books.
Singleton, R. A., Jr., Bruce C. Straits, & Straits, M. M. (1993). Approaches to social research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Sklair, L. (2008). Sociology of the global system. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.)(pp.62-70). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Smith, B. H. (1981). Narrative versions, narrative theories. In W. J. T. Mitchell(Ed.), On narrative (pp. 209-232). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Philadelphia, PA: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Philadelphia, PA: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.
Stojanovski, F. (2016, Nov 5). Bosnia and Herzegovina`s Census Shows the Demography of
Division and the Reality of Illiteracy. Retrieved fromhttps://globalvoices.org/2016/11/05/bosnia-and-herzegovinas-census-shows-the-demography-of-division-and-the-reality-of-illiteracy/
Strange, S. (2008). The declining authority of states. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.) (pp. 228-235). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thompson, J. B. (1995). The media and modernity: A social theory of the media. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Todorova, M. (Ed.). (2004). Balkan identities: Nation and memory. New York, NY: New York
University Press.
Todorova, M. (2009). Imagining the Balkans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tunbridge, J. E., & Ashworth, G. J. (1996). Dissonant heritage: The management of the past as a resource in conflict. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
UNESCO. (2010). World heritage list. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/946
UNESCO. (2016). The criteria for selection. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/
173
van Dijk, T. A. (1984). Stories about minorities. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Prejudice in discourse (pp.79-104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.). (1997). Discourse as social interaction. London: Sage.
van Ham, P. (2008). Place branding: The state of the art. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 126-149.
Wallerstein, I. (2008). The modern world-system as a capitalist world-economy. In F. J. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds.), The globalization reader (3rd ed.) (pp. 55-61). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Wertsch, J. W. (2000). Narratives as cultural tools in sociocultural analysis: Official history in
Soviet and Post- Soviet Russia, Ethos, 28(4), 511-533.
Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., & Yates, S. J. (2001). Discourse as data: A guide for analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Whyte, W. F. (1982). Interviewing in field research. In R. Burgess (Ed.), Field research: A sourcebook and field manual (pp. 111–22). London, United Kingdom: Allen &Unwin.
Wood, L.A. & Kroger, R.O. (2000). Doing discourse analysis: Methods for studying action in talk and text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wolf, M. (2004). Why globalization works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Yarwood, J. (1998). Rebuilding Mostar: Reconstruction in a war-zone. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Zukin, S. (1991). Landscapes of power: From Detroit to Disney world. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
174
APPENDICES
175
APPENDIX A
UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE INSCRIPTION PHOTOGRAPH
176
APPENDIX B
MOSTAR CENSUS RESULTS
Census 1991Census 2013
Bosniaks 44,085 34.8% Bosniaks 46,752 44.2%
Croats 42,899 33.9% Croats 51,216 48.4%
Serbs 23,789 18.8% Serbs 4,421 4.2%
Others 15,889 12.5% Others 3,408 3.2%
Total: 126,662 Total: 105,797
177
APPENDIX C
MOSTAR OLD TOWN MAP
178
APPENDIX C (continued)
MOSTAR OLD TOWN MAP
179
APPENDIX D
MOSTAR CITY MAP
180
APPENDIX E
OLD BRIDGE PHOTOGRAPHS
Old Bridge view from close distance
Old Bridge view from terrace of a restaurant
181
APPENDIX E (continued)
Old Bridge daytime view
Old Bridge at night
182
APPENDIX E (continued)
Old Bridge upper view from Old Bridge Museum`s tower
A souvenirs shop selling scarves
183
APPENDIX E (continued)
A souvenirs shop selling carpets
A restaurant where traditionally dressed mannequins stand at the entrance
184
APPENDIX E (continued)
Red parasols around Old Bridge
185
APPENDIX F
BOSANSKI COFFEE PHOTOGRAPHS
186
APPENDIX G
LIST OF INTERVIEWEES
Pseudonynm
Age
Gender
Profession
Ethnicity
Residency
MARKO
23
Male
University student and political activist
Croat
West Mostar
ANA
19
Female
University student
Croat
West Mostar
LEJLA
25
Female
Jewelry designer
Bosniak
West Mostar
NERMINA
23
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
LAMIJA
22
Female
University student and radio programmer
Bosniak
East Mostar
AZRA
26
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
JASMINA
25
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
IVAN
28
Male
Graduate student and vice-President of a political party’s youth organization
Croat
West Mostar
MISLAV
22
Male
University student
Croat
West Mostar
DAMIR
24
Male
Soldier
Bosniak
West Mostar
MARIJA
23
Female
Law student
Croat
West Mostar
ADELA
24
Female
Manager of a shopping center
Bosniak
East Mostar
187
TARIK
31
Male
Lawyer
Bosniak
West Mostar
ADIN
30
Male
Shop owner in Old Town
Bosniak
West Mostar
NADIJA
22
Female
Communication student
Bosniak
East Mostar
SANJA
22
Female
University student
Croat
West Mostar
FARIS
20
Male
IT student
Bosniak
East Mostar
ALIJA
20
Male
IT student
Bosniak
East Mostar
VEDRANA
22
Female
University student
Croat
West Mostar
JASNA
21
Female
University Student
Croat
West Mostar
EDIB
24
Male
Tourist guide at Islam Cultural Center
Bosniak
East Mostar
MIRZA
21
Male
Diver
Bosniak
East Mostar
EDVIN
28
Male
Souvenir Shop owner
Bosniak
East Mostar
AMAR
29
Male
Tourist guide
Bosniak
West Mostar
ALMA
19
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
LARISSA
32
Female
Souvenir shop owner
Bosniak
East Mostar
ZLATA
25
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
HARIS
35
Male
Employee at Islam Cultural Center
Bosniak
East Mostar
HAMDIJA
24
Male
Tour guide at Islam Cultural Center
Bosniak
East Mostar
188
ISA
53
Male
Souvenir shop owner
Bosniak
East Mostar
ADNA
28
Female
Sales assistant
Bosniak
East Mostar
EDIN
28
Male
Waiter
Bosniak
East Mostar
KRESIMIR
23
Male
University student
Croat
West Mostar
ARMIN
24
Male
IT student
Bosniak
West Mostar
DRAGANA
21
Female
Journalism student
Croat
West Mostar
AJLA
21
Female
Communication student
Bosniak
East Mostar
HAMZA
43
Male
Artist and painter
Bosniak
East Mostar
JOSIP
62
Male
Priest
Croat
West Mostar
189
APPENDIX H
INTERVIEW GUIDES
Interview Guide for Mostar residents: series of questions to ask during in-depth interviews
If someone visits Mostar for the first time, where would you take him/her? Why?
If you send a postcard to your friends overseas, which picture would you choose and why?
When did you visit Old Bridge last time? What did you do there?
How often do you go there? Do you go alone or with others (family, friends, etc)?
Do you ever talk about Old Bridge with your family, friends and others? What do they tell about the bridge?
Do you remember the first time that you have seen the Old Bridge? How old were you, then?
Do you know when the bridge was built?
What did you feel when the Old Bridge was destructed?
How did you feel when you saw the rebuilt Old Bridge?
UNESCO added Old Bridge to World Heritage List. Did you know that? Are you proud of that?
Why do you think that tourists visit/take photos of Old Bridge?
General Questions
Name
Age
Gender
Ethnic background
Religion
Profession
Education level
190
APPENDIX H (continued)
Interview Guide for Professionals: series of questions to ask during in-depth interviews with professionals employed in International Organisations in Mostar
How would you describe the role of Old Bridge in the daily life of Mostar residents?
Do you think that there is a common view on Old Bridge as a `symbol of multiculturalism` among Mostar residents?
UNESCO added Old Bridge to World Heritage List as a `symbol of multiculturalism`. Do you see Old Bridge as a symbol of multiculturalism?
Are there any conflicting views on the importance of Old Bridge among Mostar residents?
Do you see Old Bridge as a symbol of Mostar city?
How would you describe the importance of Old Bridge in terms of citybranding?
Does Old Bridge play a role in attracting tourism and investment to Mostar?
How do you evaluate the role of global authorities in locals` daily lives?
What is your organization`s view on the role and importance of Old Bridge in preserving peace and stability in Mostar?
Could you talk about the activities and projects of your organization?
191
APPENDIX I
MOSTAR DIVING CLUB PHOTOGRAPHS
Diving Club is located at the western tower of Old Bridge
A diver before jumping from the Old Bridge
192
APPENDIX J
DON’T FORGET 93 SIGN PHOTOGRAPH
193
APPENDIX K
MOSTAR RAINS POEM
Pero Zubac
Mostar rains
1. i loved a certain svetlana in mostar one autumn if only i knew whome she was sleeping with now i'd chop her i'd chop her if only i knew who was kissing her now i'd knock his i'd knock his ah if i knew who picking apricots still unripe in me
2. i was telling her you are a child you are green i was telling her everything and she wept on my hands at may words i was telling her you are an angel you are a devil your body is ripe don't pretend to be a saint and all night blue rains were raining over mostar
3. there was no sun no birds there was nothing she asked me whether i had a brother what i studied whether i was a croat whether i love rilke she asked everything she asked me if i could do the same with every girl god forbid she asked me in a low voice if i loved her and blue rains were falling over mostar she was luxuriously white in the dark od the room but she wouldn't give she wouldn't or she didn't dare devil knows
4. it is autumn that dead autumn in window-panes her eyes a bird her thighs a doe she had a mole a mole she had i dare not say she had a mole small and violet or so it seems to me she asked me if i was a croat if i had a girl if i loved rilke she asked me everything while in the window like christmas bells of my childhood water drops rang and a night song softly along downtown hey suleman mother's son
194
5. she spread her years upon the floor her eyes were full ripe peaches her breasts were warm as puppies i told her she was stupid she was putting on airs svetlana svetlana do you know this is the atomic age de gaulle gagarin and such nonsense i told her everything she wept she wept
6. i took her to the bazaar dives i toke her everywhere i hid her in caves carried her to a balcony under bridges we played hide and seek the neretva a filly under an old bridge i spoke of crnjanski how marvelous he is how marvelous
7. i drew her knees in wet sand she laughed so merrily so innocently like first lilies i took her to mosques karadjoz bey dead too dead under his heavy tomb so shantich's grave she carried some flowers cried a little like a women i took her everywhere
8. it is this summer now i am now quite different i write some poems in a newspaper half a column gor pero zubac and nothing more and all the night blue rains were falling over mostar she was luxuriously white in the dark od the room but she wouldn't give she wouldn't od she didn't dare devil knows
9. that sky those clouds those roofs the pale sun of the hungry boy over mostar i can't forget nor her hair her small tongue like a strawberry her laughter which could hurt like a curse that player in the chapel on the white fill god is great she said he will outlive us nor those heavy blue rains oh autumn her barren autumn
10. she spoke of films of james dean she spoke about everything a bit sadly a bit pathetically or karenina
195
she said clyde griffiths could not hurt a fly i laughed you are stupid he is a murdeerer you are a child of but those streets those news-boys selling the latest edition of liberation those half withered grapes in shop-windows i can't forget that bitter barren autumn over mostar those rains ske kissed me all night long and caressed me and nothing more i swear by my mother we did nothing more
11. after that summers came again rains came again only one short letter from ljubljana why there those leaves on pavements those days i can't i don't know how to erase
12. she writes she asked me what i do how i live if i have a girl whether i ever think of her and of that autumn of those rains she is now the same she swears by god quite the same shall i believe her shall i laugh i cursed christ a long time ago and i don't quite love her whether she swore or not it must be so lies are worthlees
13. i talked to her of lermontov chagall i told her everything she carried with her on old zweig's book read in the afternoon her hair was threaded with summer the yellow colour of the sun a little of the sea first night her skin was also somewhat salty fish asleep in her blood we laughed at the boys who were jumping from bridges for cigarettes we laughed because it was not summer and thay were jumping they are real children she said they could die they could get pneumonia
14. then her long too long silences came i could freely think about anything explain spinoza for hours i could look at others at leisure throw stones down rock i could also go somewhere go far away i colud have died alone on her breasts more lonely than anyone i could have turned into a bird water a rock i could have done all this
15. her fingers were long weak bloodless but quick we played lady-bird and hide and seek
196
svetlana get out you are under the rock i am not blinde i am not stupid come up don't hesitate you'll be beaten when it was her turn i could flee into the river itself she would find me she smells me immediately she says she knows me well i never belived her she may have peeped through her fingers she liked chestnuts we picked them round about she carried them to the room hung them on threads she loved roses those autumn roses i brought her when they withered she would put them into a tin
16. i asked her what she thought oh this world whether she belived in communism whether she would like to be natasha rostova i asked her everything sometimes stupid questions i know that only too well i asked her whether she'd like a small son blond say she jumped from enthusiasm yes yes and all of a sudden she was overpowere by grief like dead fruits she mustn't she mustn't she wouldn't do that for her life do you hear him he thinks it's so easy as if i had fallen from jupiter who then is that zubac pera that he should be that mn and not somebody else by no means he thinks he is at least brando or such a one
17. i told her you are stupid you are clever you are a devil you are an angel i told her everything she believed nothing you men are born liars you are rascals she said everything and blue rains were falling over mostar
18. i really loved that svetlana one autumn if only i knew who she was sleeping with now i'd chop his i'd chop his if only i knew who was kissing her now i'd knock his i'd knock his alas if only i knew who was picking apricots still unripe in me
1965
Translation: © Branko Momchilovicj
________ Pero Zubac: Mostar rains First published: Weekly magazine 'Telegram', Zagreb, October 1965.
197
VITA
EDUCATION: BA, Political Science and International Relations, Marmara University,
Istanbul, Turkey, 2002
MA, Public Diplomacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
California, 2008
PhD, Communication, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois,
2017
TEACHING: Department of Communication, University of Illinois at Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois: Fundamentals of Media Communication, Fall 2012
HONORS: 2012 The University of Illinois Foundation Graduate Fellowship for Study
of Eastern Europe, University of Illinois at Chicago
2012 Young Atlanticist NATO Working Group Fellowship, Atlantic
Council, Washington
2008-2010 UIC Board of Trustees Tuition Waiver, University of Illinois at
Chicago
2006-2008 Fulbright Scholarship 2006-2008 Dean`s Discretionary Award, USC Annenberg School of Communication, University of Southern California 2004 Swiss Government Scholarship, Geneva Centre for Security Policy, Geneva, Switzerland
PROFESSIONAL
MEMBERSHIPS: National Communication Association
Eastern Communication Association
Association of Public Diplomacy Scholars
Geneva Center for Security Policy Alumni
198
PUBLICATIONS: Noyan, G. (2013). Dialogical Narrations in the Divided City of Mostar. In
Tosoni, S., Tarantino, M., & Giaccardi, C. (Eds.), Media &
the City:Urbanism,Technology and Communication (pp. 214-232),
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Noyan, G. (2011). Media`s Response to Terrorism and its Effects on
the Coverage of Social Movements: An Analysis of Media Frames
Employed in Anti-Globalization Movement. In Baybars-Hawks, B., &
Baruh, L. (Eds.), If It Was Not For Terrorism: Crisis, Compromise,
and Elite Discourse in the Age of ``War on Terror`` (pp.130-149),
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Berti, B. & Noyan, G. (2012, 24 March). Turkey`s Dilemma: How to
Act on Syria without Losing Soft Power. e-International Relations.
http://www.e-ir.info/2012/03/24/turkeys-dilemma-how-to-act-on-
syria- without-losing-soft-power/
Berti, B., Noyan, G., Grozdanova, & Petrovic, J. (2012, 27 March). Taking the next step: Security Sector Reform in Libya. Open Democracy. http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/benedetta- berti-gonca- noyan-hristiana-grozdanova-jelena-petrovic/taking-next- step-secur Berti, B. , Noyan, G., Grozdanava, & Petrovic, J. (2012, 30 March). Dealing with the Past, Winning the Future: Implementing Intelligence Reform in Libya. Blogactiv EU. http://guests.blogactiv.eu/ 2012/03/30/ dealing-with-the-past-winning-the-future-implementing- intelligence-reform-in-libya/
PRESENTATIONS: Noyan, G. (2012). Old Bridge as a Symbol of Multiculturalism:
Global Discourse and Local Narratives in Mostar. Media and the City
Workshop, Catholic University of Milan, February 10, 2012, Milan,
Italy.
Noyan, G., Stoner, A. and Schandorf, M. (2010). Framing Local Conflict on a Global Scale: A Comparative Analysis of Media Coverage of the 2009 Iranian Presidential Election in Turkey and the US. 7th Annual University of Illinois Communication Colloboration Conference, May 1, 2010, Communication and the Media Research Institute (CAMRI), University of Illinois, Urbana IL, USA.
199
Noyan, G. (2010). Inaugural Speeches of U.S. Presidents on the Brink of War. Eastern Communication Association (ECA) 101st Annual Convention, April 22-25, 2010, Baltimore MD, USA. Noyan, G. (2010).An Analysis of Media Frames Employed in Anti- Globalization Movement: Did Anti- Globalization Movement Collapse in tandem with Twin Towers?. 8th International Conference on New Directions in the Humanities, June 29- July 2, 2010, UCLA, Los Angeles CA, USA. Noyan, G. (2009).Framing Globalization. A Case Study of `Global Voices`. 7th Development Dialogue, June 2-3, 2009, Institute of Social Studies (ISS), Hague, Netherlands. Noyan, G. (2009).Winning Hearts and Minds through Facework: Al Hurra as a Case Study. 2nd International Global Studies Conference, May 30- June 1, 2009, Dubai, UAE.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder