veoma normalno ok export - stealth.ultd.netstealth.ultd.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/very.normal.pdf · Ljudi se prilagođavaju stvarnosti, i prilagođavajući se, gube iluzije

VERY NORMAL, VERY NORMAL

On utopia of urban rights

VEOMA NORMALNO, VEOMA NORMALNO

O utopiji urbanih prava





Ljudi se prilagođavaju stvarnosti, i prilagođavajući se, gube iluzije. Utopija je, prema tome, putem prilagodbe zagubljena u pobjedonosnoj prozračnoj stvarnosti kojoj više nije potreban nikakav smisao orijentacije prema krajnjem cilju.

Rade Kalanj, Utopijske vizije: Mijene utopijske svijesti, 2004.

3

PROLOG: FUTUREALITY CHECK

X: Da potpišemo utopijsku povelju?

N. Č.: Super, čovječe! Ja sam neke godine bio dio Asocijacije arhitekata, i moj prvi prijedlog je bio da napravimo povelju o gradu. Ona je trebala da sadrži neko mišljenje, odluku o tome kakav grad treba da bude. To je bilo malo iza rata, al’ već se pokazalo da stvari idu, tako, nekontrolisano.

N. Č.: (...) Govorim ti o jednom naučnom me-todu planiranja koji kaže: postoje građanski paneli, gdje se govori na nivou građana, a drugo je ekspertni tim. Zato mislim da bi ta budućnost bila nekako jače argumentovana; ako postoje glasovi koji su za i protiv, neka bude uključeno i ono što dolazi od građana. Mislim da bi to ovdje bilo jako dobro. Neko će vas pitati A šta građani? Pa, eto, nismo s njima ništa radili. A to je rupa.

X: I ti si građanin.

N. Č.: Znam. Ali, ja sam već opterećen strukom.

X: Pa, dobro, ali mi smo razgovarali sa X ljudi, ljudi koji su opterećeni strukom i onih koji nisu. I, zapravo, generalni zaključak je upravo to što si rekao ranije: tvoji studenti 1997., München...

N. Č.: Jeste. Odbili su da prave vizije za Sarajevo, odbili su vizionarsko razmišljanje.

X: Odbili… zato što se mora popravljati.

N. Č.: Tačno.

(...)

N. Č.: Na stranici Evropske unije ima jedan divan dio u kojem se govori o metodama pro-gnoziranja. Prognoziranje uz sticanje znanja; spoznaja koje će osigurati da je ta vizija sigurna, bliska budućnosti kakva će biti ili kakvu ćemo napraviti.

X: Šta je to, da li je to ta povelja? Da li ćemo ići na manifest?

N. Č.: Znaš šta, recimo, ako govorimo o gradu… European Urban Charter II, Evropska povelja o gradu II, koju je 2008. usvojila Evropska uni-ja… Dakle, to je jedan krasan dokument koji će svako prihvatiti, ako hoćemo da to bude grad za svakoga. A to znači da sadašnji evropski grad nije grad za svakoga. Sadržaj tog dokumenta je opšteprihvaćen, lako prihvatljiv, i može biti vaša povelja. Ako ovu povelju prihvatimo, ako je prepišemo, odgovorit ćemo na pitanja koja postaviš bilo kojem čovjeku. I svaki čovjek će svaku njenu tačku prihvatiti i reći; Jeste, to je moja budućnost. Dakle, jedan mudar, pametan, širok dokument.

N. Č.: Ima ona svoju neku genezu. Mislim, tu je toliko dokumenata, samo ispadaju iz Evrope. A i oni su napravljeni isto kao prostorni plan razvoja Evrope: na iskustvima, praksama, dosti-gnutim i željenim ciljevima svih zemalja, uklju-čujući i istočne zemlje. Dakle, to nije preporuka koja dolazi sa Zapada. Ona dolazi sa Zapada, ali ona integriše sva neka globalna htijenja, isku-stva nekog budućeg grada. Ali, kad se pročita ta povelja, onda je to strašno, kad vidimo šta nemamo.

X: Onda je to taj reality check.

N. Č.: Baš tako. Bravo.

Z: Futureality check!

N. Č.: Ova povelja nije utopijska, nije tako zami-šljena. Ona je zamišljena kao realna.

X: A zapravo je utopijska.

N. Č.: Koliko se vaša razlikuje od te? Možda nikako.

5

Februar 2012., Sarajevo. Počinjemo razgovore o tome šta sarajevski pisci, arhitekte, umjetnici, režiseri, antropolozi, bibliotekari, aktivisti, kul-turni radnici – ali prvenstveno građani Sarajeva – imaju na umu kada ih pitate za njihove vizije o budućnosti ovoga grada. Već pred sobom zamišljamo mogući manifest. A onda će, odjed-nom, sljedećih nekoliko redova, iz razgovora prenesenog na prethodnim stranicama, priči dati neočekivani zaokret:

N. Č.: Ova povelja nije utopijska, nije tako zami-šljena. Ona je zamišljena kao realna.

X: A zapravo je utopijska.

Može li težnja za nečim što se čini kao puka normalnost postati idealno viđenje budućnosti grada i društva?

Veoma normalno, veoma normalno ili O utopi-ji urbanih prava je sarajevska edicija, četvrta u seriji istraživanja Gradski registar, koja ispituju šta je u igri urbanog razvoja i kakva su očeki-vanja gradova na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije i Albanije. Inicijalna kapisla za ovo istraživanje, tada 2009., bile su akcije građana Zagreba, Pule, Skoplja, Beograda... kao i kopanje novinara na teme divlje urbanizacije i naglog investiranja ka-pitala. Ovi, prvi, nesigurni znakovi borbe protiv nestajanja i rasprodaje zajedničkog dobra, koji su tada više izgledali kao incidenti, ponukali su nas da zagrebemo ispod površine i mapiramo šta je to što danas formira gradove u regionu. Ubrzo je postalo jasno da su ekspanzija ulaganja u nekretnine, politika neupitne privatizacije, ko-rupcija, skriveni dealovi i nelegalne investicije, zapravo opšti obrazac koji ukazuje na profiterski razvoj (ne samo ovih) gradova i nepobitnu ulo-gu vlasti u tome. U nedostatku ideja i vizija šta bi grad kao kolektivni prostor djelovanja mogao da bude, odlučili smo da u pomoć pozovemo rijetki preostali, ali zanemareni, pa čak i ismi-jani alat – utopiju, kao polaznu tačku u potrazi za normalnijom budućnošću – upravo ovdje u Sarajevu.

Kako takva normalnija budućnost onda izgleda?

O tome šta bi Sarajevo u budućnosti moglo postati i kako bi moglo izgledati, pitali smo 13 sagovornika, od kojih smo očekivali snažne indicije, ili barem izazovne ideje. Umjesto toga, nakon mnogo sati žive diskusije shvatili smo da doseg utopijskog projiciranja danas nalikuje onome što se nekada smatralo normalnim. Nor-malnost je postala utopija.

Odlučili smo da Evropsku povelju o gradu 1 i 2 (European Urban Charter 1 & 2), zasnovanu na teško prigovorivoj i lijepoj zamisli o gradu za svakoga i svakodnevicu, uporedimo sa stvar-nošću Sarajeva. Prema riječima Savjeta Evrope, ovi dokumenti, prvi izrađen 1992. i njegova važna revizija iz 2008., pionirski su korak pre-ma evropskim standardima o tome šta urbano okruženje treba da obezbijedi građanima Evro-pe. Ništa utopijsko – već, na prvi pogled, dostiž-no stanje, krajnja normalnost.

Međutim, osvrt na datume nastanka ovih de-klaracija, daje neočekivani istorijski zaokret. Godine 1992. i 2008., prvenstveno za Sarajevo, a zatim i svijet, bez presedana osporavaju očeki-vanja definisana ovim dokumentima. Ko bi, baš pred početak opsade Sarajeva 1992., u povelji o gradu napisao: grad (…) je oduvijek bio ide-alno mjesto okupljanja, tamo gdje je zajednica i društveni život moguć, bez koga je, po riječima Thomasa Hobbesa, život “gadan, siromašan, usa-mljen, brutalan i kratak”.

A, zatim će 2008. upravo sam urbani razvoj, uporno i neopravdano ubjeđenje u njegov ne-zaustavljivi rast, kao i uspon urbane ekonomije kao jedine relevantne (zasnovane na efemernim proizvodima kao što su znanje, turizam ili sam urbanitet), na planetarnom nivou srušiti taj san o urbanom – kroz odliv hipoteka i spekulacije nekretninama.

Zaključni paragraf povelje revidirane 2008. navodi: Želimo da prenesemo ovu optimističnu, ambicioznu i zahtjevnu poruku našim građa-nima i svima onima koji su uključeni u urbani razvoj. Predlažemo ovu Povelju kao poziv za gradnju novog urbanog projekta za gradove

6

širom Evrope, zasnovanog na razmjeni vrijedno-sti i iskustava, tako da mali i veliki gradovi mogu zadržati svoju individualnost, dok kolektivno otjelovljuju evropski plan koji je jedinstvena kom-binacija humanističkih vrijednosti, individualne slobode, ekonomskog prosperiteta, društvene soli-darnosti, brige za planetu i kulture življenja.

Da je napisana samo nekoliko mjeseci kasnije, nakon što je globalni potres zbog propasti Leh-man Brothersa postao vidljiv (15. septembra 2008. ova kompanija podnijela je zahtjev za zaštitu od bankrota), ova Povelja najvjerovatnije bi imala manje optimističan ton – a njena vjera u novi urbani projekat bila bi suštinski i surovo suočena sa realnošću.

Gledajući šta Evropska deklaracija o urbanim pravima, koja je proizašla iz Evropske povelje o gradu predlaže, citiramo set od 20 tačaka, razli-čitih prava – kao što su: sigurnost, nezagađena i zdrava životna sredina, zaposlenje, stanovanje, kretanje, zdravlje, sport i slobodno vrijeme, kultura, multikulturalna integracija, kvalitetna arhitektura i fizičko okruženje, harmonizacija funkcija, učešće, ekonomski razvoj, održivi ra-zvoj, usluge i roba, prirodna bogatstva i resursi, lična realizacija, inter-lokalna saradnja, finan-sijski mehanizmi i strukture, jednakost – koja bi trebala biti dodijeljena, zapravo garantovana građanima evropskih gradova.

Prateći tačke ove Deklaracije, iz današnje per-spektive, i suočavajući ih sa stavovima i mišlje-njima naših sagovornika u Sarajevu, o tome kakav bi idealni grad u budućnosti trebao biti, normativni karakter ovog dokumenta ubrzo biva podriven. Fragmenti razgovora o Saraje-vu, gradu koji je poklopljen prošlošću da jedva svjesno živi sadašnji trenutak, raspoređeni po tačkama Povelje, ukazuju na nedostižni i uto-pijski karakter njenih, zaista, veoma normalnih standarda. Apsurdnost tog očekivanog prava na grad za građane, kakvim bi on stvarno trebao biti, koje su ove dvije povelje stekle neposredno nakon njihovog objavljivanja, u kombinaciji sa težnjom naših sagovornika u Sarajevu ka us-postavljanju normalnosti, dali su okvir potrazi

za utopijom danas. Time relevantnost potrebe dostizanja normalnosti grada za građane, kroz (r)evoluciju potencijala grada prestaje da bude samo lokalna.

Publikacija Veoma normalno, veoma normalno vodi nas kroz sumnje, dileme, bljeskove utopije, pesimizam, povremeni optimizam, motivacije, i poneku briljantnu ideju o današnjem Sarajevu i njegovoj mogućoj budućnosti. Pripadajući Pickpad poster odvodi nas u 2023. godinu. Vrijeme u kojem više nema tranzicije, vrijeme retro-utopije i crnog humora, u kome su stvari konačno u rukama građana.

*

Tog februara 2012. grad je postao scena neobič-nog spektakla sila prirode. Dok smo sa ljudima pričali o njihovim utopijskim vizijama za Sara-jevo, u istoriju grada ušao je i taj snijeg. Kažu to je posebna vrsta, koja pada samo u Sibiru. Pada i na -15. To nije normalno. Višednevno zatrpava-nje grada, i metarske gomile snijega, učinile su da svakodnevne aktivnosti, kao prelazak preko ulice i odlazak do prodavnice, postanu prave avanture. Ljudi pod snijegom se mole da ne bacaju smeće već da ga zadržavaju na terasama kako ne bi došlo do pretrpavanja ulica.

I nakon malo oklijevanja, mnoge Sarajlije došle su do istog zaključka: oni će, zajednički, morati da uzmu stvari u svoje ruke, i izbace snijeg iz grada, kako bi se nekako vratili u normalu. Priča o snijegu i onome što sila prirode može da uradi jednoj urbanoj sredini, gradu, metafora je op-šteg stanja društva, trenutka snježne idile kada se pojedinac pokreće, institucija staje, a građani nezvanično i zajednički formiraju proplamsaje utopijske akcije i solidarnosti.

Ana Džokić, Asja Hafner i Marc Neelen

7

ŽIVOT U VANREDNOM STANJU

1. SIGURNOST:Pravo na siguran i bezbjedan grad, oslobođen, koliko je moguće, od kriminala, delinkvencije i nasilja.

Evropska deklaracija o urbanim pravima, iz Evropske povelje o gradu

Na konferenciji za novinare, javnosti su pred-

stavljeni statistički podaci o radu Ministarstva

unutrašnjih poslova Kantona Sarajevo i Uprave

policije u 2012. godini. U 2012., registrovano je

6.879 krivičnih djela, što je za 306 djela ili 4,3

posto manje u odnosu na prethodnu godinu.

Tokom 2012. prijavljena su 223 krivična djela

protiv života i tijela, što je 26 više u odnosu na

2011. godinu. [...] Predstavnici nadležnih insti-

tucija posebno su naglasili prioritete za 2013.

godinu – sprečavanje vršenja organizovanog

kriminala, sprečavanje trgovine narkoticima,

trgovine ljudima, korupcije, uličnog kriminala,

otuđenja motornih vozila, privredni kriminali-

tet, te poboljšanje saradnje sa drugim policij-

skim agencijama. Zaključak konferencije glasi

da je Sarajevo, unatoč navedenim podacima,

ipak, među najsigurnijim gradovima u Evropi,

sa stopom ubistva 1:100.000. [...] Planiran je

raspis konkursa za 170 policajaca, a krajem

godine, raspisat će se još jedan za dodatnih

130 policajaca. Tada će i stepen sigurnosti biti

povećan.

(Izvor: 24sata.info)

BEZ DRŽAVE KAO UTOČIŠTA

A. T.: Izgubljeno je povjerenje u samu državu kao svojevrsno utočište. Nije samo ovdje tako. Ljudi se organizuju u države da bi imali nešto zagarantovano, da bi se oslobodili svog straha od života, od svijeta, od bilo čega... I ovdje su strukture vlasti, ne samo država nego sve struk-ture vlasti, toliko iznevjerile očekivanja, a još

8

uvijek nemamo osnažen neki nevladin sektor ili bilo šta kroz šta bi sami građani mogli artikuli-sati svoje zahtjeve. Dakle, da bi to neko ustvari mogao implementirati. Oni ne znaju ni kome ovdje izručiti svoje nezadovoljstvo. Ko ovdje sluša uopšte? Svjesni su da politika nije umijeće upravljanja društvom nego je to umijeće dola-ženja na vlast i što dužeg zadržavanja na vlasti. Toga su svi postali svjesni. E, sad, ko na koji način artikuliše tu svoju svijest o tome: neko će opsovati, neko će to izanalizirati, ali manje-više svi znaju da se na politiku ne može računati kao na dio društvenog progresa, ne samo ovdje – ali pogotovo ovdje. Jer, naša država je izvršni organ tajkunerije.

KRIVO SRASTANJE

N. K.: (…) Onaj jedan Skendo, koji je presre-tao ljude po ulici u Sarajevu, imao je rečenice koje su bile izvučene iz konteksta, ali potpuno smislene, luđačke. Samo te presretne na ulici i kaže Bojim se da ne odemo previše u istoriju. Tako i ja sad, bojim se da ne odemo previše u istoriju. Ovdje su istorijsko-političke perspek-tive neminovne. (...) Ne želim da umanjim ljudske napore, naročito ljudske žrtve koje su date za ideju neke države, ali nisam siguran da mi imamo državotvorni mentalitet. Imam neki osjećaj da smo mi dobili državu a ne znamo šta ćemo s njom. Ovo jeste politička priča, ali ima i veze sa stanjem duha ovdje. Znaš po čemu ja to testiram… Šta je meni argument za takvu jednu smjelu postavku… To što imaš jedno vrlo ustrajno odsustvo istorijskog računanja vremena, pošto se ovdje država mjeri ljudskim vijekom: jer, za deset godina, jarane, đe ću ja biti. Deset godina je za istoriju jedan potpuno irele-vantan period, a šta ćeš ti reći penzioneru koji ima 75 godina i ne zna kako živi od danas do sutra: Ništa ne brini, za deset godina, vidjet ćeš? Vrlo je teško to kreirati ako to ne postoji kao refleks za nove generacije. Ne može se i neće se desiti za našeg vremena.

N. K.: Imam osjećaj da su naše političke elite u velikoj mjeri još uvijek naslijeđe rata i jednog, bez obzira što se ne puca, haotičnog stanja

kompromisa i improvizacije. Što kaže Johnny Štulić: krivo srastanje.

X: Plodovi tog krivo posađenog...

N. K.: To drvo je drvo života, a krívō, to nije obično drvo, to nije bilo koje drvo. To nije šuma. To je jedno drvo, vitalno, a ako ga svedemo na jednu tako simboličku ravan – ono je otišlo u krivom pravcu. Kako se sad to ispravlja – ne znam. Samo sam siguran da je dugotrajno, sve društvene promjene su dugotrajni procesi i to vrlo često jeste uzrok ljudske frustracije. Čovjek nije u mogućnosti da vidi konkretne promjene u nekoj bržoj dinamici, opet, iz perspektive ljudskog života. (...) Zato je časno boriti se za pretpostavke, za buduće generacije, za ljude koje mi nećemo ni upoznati, koji možda ništa neće znati o nama.

NESIGURNIJI ŽIVOT, A BOLJI LIFESTYLE

S. M.: To što je tad bio mir pa si imao mit bordo pasoša i tako dalje… to je prosto, idealizacija neke prošlosti sa ciljem očuvanja lijepog sjeća-nja; dakle, to ti daje neku sigurnost. Naravno, danas, kad živiš, ono, što bi rekli, od danas do sutra – pogotovo svi mi koji radimo projekte i tako dalje... Tad si mogao planirati, tad si imao ugovor na četrdeset godina i imao si stalni radni odnos, pa si mogao da planiraš prvomajske pra-znike, pa su svi imali neke zimnice, i tako dalje. Mislim, je l’, pošto je bio habitus takav… Pa svi kupovali Dostojevskog na metar. (...) Prosto se promijenila forma, način života se promijenio. I sad, naravno, da mi još uvijek živimo u ide-alizaciji prošlosti? Zašto? Zato jer je tada bilo ušuškano i toplo. Sigurno. Danas nije sigurno, ali mislim da dobar dio ljudi danas mnogo bolje živi nego što je živio tada.

GDJE SE VIDIŠ ZA 10 GODINA?

N. J.: Deset godina u budućnosti? Ne znam ni za narednih deset mjeseci, a kamoli deset godina.

X: Ja sam mislila da je kod nas to, da ga tako na-zovemo, defekt – da ne pravimo planove. Da li je

9

to zbog proživljenog iskustva, da baš ne možeš da utičeš, ili je to nekako svjetski trend?

N. J.: Pazi, ja mislim da naši roditelji nisu imali takav problem. Njih budućnost nije morala zanimati i možda to jeste ta vrsta inercije ili oslonjenosti na inerciju, ako se može govoriti o nekakvom mentalitetu, nekakvim kognitivnim mapama; možda je to doprinijelo tome da su ljudi kraj socijalizma doživjeli zapravo potpuno nesvjesni traume koja slijedi i u šta može da se pretvori i u šta se pretvorilo. U tom smislu, ima-te priče o manjku odgovornosti. Nije to potpuno lišeno osnova.

N. J.: Ja sam se prvi put sa tim Gdje se vidiš za pet godina, gdje se vidiš za 10 godina? susreo u procesu zapošljavanja u jednoj firmi koja je bila ustrojena, da tako kažem, po ovom zapadnom sistemu. Znači, tu imate nešto što se zove human resources, i kad dolazite na intervju, u tom kapi-talističkom ključu, vi morate projicirati. I mi sad vidimo koliko je to, zapravo, potpuno besmisle-no. Na šta su upućivali sadržaj tog pitanja i sadr-žaj tog odgovora? Šta nam oni zaista govore? Da li će se oni desiti? Pa, sama ta firma, ako zaista postoji u kapitalističkom univerzumu, na tržištu može propasti koliko sutra. I mi danas vidimo da to, zapravo, nije incident, nego je to, takoreći, upravo obrazac. Očigledno je da su takva pita-nja – taj imperativ da sebi planiramo, da vidimo sebe za deset godina, ne znam, na kojoj poziciji, na kojoj funkciji, u kojoj, ono, platnoj kategoriji – svojevrsna farsa. Postoji taj farsični element kojim su ljudi sami sebe uvjeravali da stvari idu prirodnim tokom nabolje ili da neće biti gore, u svakom slučaju. Dok stvari idu nagore, je li. Očigledno je to dio cijele priče Gdje ćemo biti za deset godina. E, hvala.

KOMPLIKOVANO I ANGAŽOVANO

X: Da li je utopija možda ostvarljivija, naprimjer, u Norveškoj?

A. H.: Život u Norveškoj, u Skandinaviji, gene-ralno je predvidljiv. Mislim, to je super, ja sam siguran, mogu da dobijam platu redovno, idem

na ferije, ovo, ono... Sve to, u ovom kontekstu, naravno, znači puno, pošto većina ljudi ovdje to nema. Ali, stvarno, u jednom momentu, mož-da postoji i paralela između te vrste društva i ove vrste društva. Na neki način stvara se neki osjećaj paralize u čovjeku, čeka se, ustvari, da se nešto desi. Nema, znači, motiva. Teško je naći motiv da se ti angažuješ u Norveškoj; ja ne znam šta bi bio motiv. Kako da kažem, mi ljudi uvijek komplikujemo život, na jedan ili drugi način. Ako mi ne izaberemo ono što će nam zakomplikovati život, on će se zakomplikovati sam od sebe kroz neke druge, glupe, manje vri-jedne stvari. Znači, moj dolazak ovdje je pokušaj da svjesno izaberem nešto što čini život na neki način interesantnijim.

X: Komplikovanijim ili interesantnijim?

A. H.: Mislim da to uvijek ide jedno s drugim, poklapa se.

NIVO UTOPIJE U KRVI

N. K.: Pazi, ako govorimo o individualnim utopijama – mislim da je o njima najviše riječ – onda su tu čudni omjeri ljudskih motivacija, jer mi smo svi naprosto toliko različiti međusobno da ljudi imaju različite perspektive na iste stvari. (...) I onda kada vjerujemo u bolju budućnost… radi se o omjeru, a omjer je kao holesterol u

10

krvi. Imaš normalni holesterol s kojim živiš, koji ti je normalno fiziološko stanje, kao što imaš i vjeru u neku bolju budućnost, koja na neki način postoji u tebi kao nekakva usvojena uto-pijska vizija.

X: A, šta znači uopšte to vjerovati u utopiju?

N. K.: Ja mislim da je vjerovanje u utopiju, samo po sebi, kao jezička konstrukcija, problematično, kao vjerovanje u nemoguće. Ne bih se ja sad uvlačio u te ezoteričke sfere. Hajmo se vratiti u realni život. Konkretno, ako hoćemo da otvori-mo prozor i pogledamo na šta liče život i ljudi, odnosno, sve to zajedno, onda ti se naravno, nameću egzistencijalni problemi. (...) A ipak, ljudi nemaju posla, a boga mole da ga ne nađu. Čekaju da se desi neka situacija u koju će se uklopiti. E, e, e… sad, to je ta sfera iluzija… da ja maštam, a ako maštam a to je neutemeljeno, pa da li treba i dalje da maštam? To je jedan zatvo-reni krug gdje ganjaš vlastiti rep, i govoriš, ono, imam šanse, možda jednog dana...

N. K.: Ne treba zaboraviti jednu stvar: živimo u sistemu koji je uljuljkao mnoge od nas. Ono što Czesław Miłosz kaže, da možeš naslijediti stvari preko iskustva svojih bližnjih, pa čak i onda kad ih nisi i sam doživio… I dobre i loše. (...) Postoji ovdje cijela jedna tradicija poricanja, na nivou mentaliteta, u puno varijacija. I to je djelimično uzrok ili posljedica utopije. Vjerovatno i jedno i drugo.

X: A šta bi bilo s tim nekim bosanskim snom?

N. K.: Pa, naravno da postoji. Ja živim taj neki san. Ne kažem da sam ja sad potpuno različit od ambijenta, ali pokušavam da nađem, da ulovim neke stvari u tom nekakvom društvenom stanju, da radim stvari koje želim da radim. Mislim da je velika i, ono, zajebana spoznaja ljudske zre-losti da život ne bude onakav kakav ne može – nego da bude slično.

11

ZAGAĐIVANJE (LJUDSKE) PRIRODE

2. NEZAGAĐENA I ZDRAVA ŽIVOTNA SREDINA:Pravo na životnu sredinu bez zagađenja vazduha, vode i zemlje, bez buke, gdje postoji zaštita prirode i prirodnih resursa.


Svjetska zdravstvena organizacija proglasila

je Sarajevo najzagađenijim gradom u Evropi

2011. godine, a britanski list Guardian navodi

da je Sarajevo bilo najzagađenije na Starom

kontinentu i 2012. godine. Međutim, sarajev-

ski Zavod za javno zdravstvo tvrdi da to nije

istina, jer je godišnji prosjek za 2012. godinu,

prema rezultatima mjernih stanica Zavoda,

bio “između 84 i 87 µg čestica prašine po

metru kubnom metru vazduha”. “Atina je u

istom periodu imala prosječno zagađenje

sitnim česticama od 98 µg/m3”. […] Martin

Tais, stručnjak za kvalitet vazduha i klimatske

promjene, ističe da je Sarajevo “crna tačka na

evropskoj mapi najzagađenijih gradova”. U

zimskom periodu, tokom temperaturnih inver-

zija, koncentracija otrovnih čestica u vazduhu

nerijetko dostiže alarmantne vrijednosti i tada

je zdravlje stanovništva najviše ugroženo. [...]

Deutsche Welle upozorava da problemi neće

nestati – stanovništvo Sarajeva je sve siro-

mašnije pa, kako nema novaca za kvalitetno

gorivo, u svojim pećima spaljuju sve i svašta.

Ali, drvo je skupo, a zima je stisla. Zato se u

peć baca baš sve i svašta. [...] Sarajevo je

zimi kao u loncu u kome se tokom tempe-

raturnih inverzija zadržavaju koncentracije

čestica PM10 – kaže Martin Tais. [...] I auto-

mobili mogu ozbiljno da zagade okolinu. EU

je obavezala gradove koji su se suočavali sa

većim koncentracijama lebdećih čestica u

vazduhu da smanje zagađenje. To je urađeno

tako što su u gradovima formirane ekološke

zone, gdje se ne dopušta vožnja automobila

koji zagađuju okolinu.

(Izvor: Avaz.ba)

TREBEVIĆ DO MORA

S. R.: Ja imam jednu veliku želju, jednu veliku utopiju – al’ znam da ne postoji finansijska mo-gućnost za nju – a to je: da Trebević odguram do mora. Na Miljacki bi imao valove i medite-ransku klimu.

X: Aha, to... Trebević u more.

S. R.: Do mora, do mora odgurati.

ŠUMA U CENTRU GRADA

Z. Ć.: A, onda, poslije rata, kreneš ponovo putova-ti, pa gdje god dođeš vidiš da svaki grad ima veliki park. Recimo, u Barceloni ima park Citadela, sa je-zerom nasred, gdje ljudi veslaju; pa leže na travi… čitaju knjige, pa ručaju, izlaze na pauze… pa je za vikend sve to puno – krasno! I tako je nekako i meni bila varijanta: šta u Sarajevu, gdje su parkovi uništeni kao takvi, a nikad nisu ni bili posebno na-pravljeni? Nemamo više ni Trebevića, Vrelo Bosne je na potpuno suprotnom dijelu grada. Gdje mi možemo napraviti park? A onda, upravo u tom trenutku, neke dvijehiljadite, kad je još uvijek sve srušeno bilo, ja sam nekako zamišljao potez od

12

Skenderije, preko Valtera Perića, koji i dan-danas stoji tako razrušen, preko stare fabrike duhana, gdje sad… – što su nadigli i ne znam – pa ula-ziš u prostor Vilsonovog šetališta… I ja bih sve to gur’o do Bristola. S tim, da ostane Muzej, da osta-ne Parlamentarna skupština, da ostane fakultet, i te institucije… a sve ostalo – diže se asfalt i pravi se ozbiljna šuma. I, onda, u toj svojoj viziji, ja ko-ristim i rijeku Miljacku, jer mi nemamo ozbiljne rijeke k’o svi gradovi. (A nijedan grad nije ozbiljan ako nema veliku rijeku, ili ako ne iskoristi to jada od rijeke što ima…) Tako je moja ideja bila da se Miljacka počisti. (...) I da se sazida, kad gledaš pre-ma gradu, na lijevoj strani, šta ja znam, tri metra betonskog podzida – ili kako se to već zove – is-pod kojeg je šetalište.

X: Ti hodaš po tome?

Z. Ć.: Tako je. I to sve fura Miljackom do Vijeć-nice. Tako da ti, praktički, šetajući uz rijeku, ne ideš pored tramvaja, ne ideš glupim trotoarima, ne – ti ideš uz Miljacku. (...) I imaš stepenice koje te izvlače na određenoj lokaciji, a dole da imaš klupicu, žardinjericu, cvijet, neko ludilo... Imaš taj potez velikog parka, te velike šume i imaš to šetalište kojim mi možemo da šetamo, trčimo, vozimo bicikl, uživamo, šetamo cuke... To je u mojoj viziji, u kojoj sam ja apsolutni vladar Sarajeva i imam pravo da određujem šta će biti. (...) To je otprilike bila moja prva vizija,

alternativa dok ne napravimo Žičaru i osposo-bimo Trebević, gdje opet možemo voditi dijete, k’o što su i mene vodili. Bio sam fasciniran Žičarom, i danas ja njemu objašnjavam kako je išla... Ali ne možeš to objasniti, iako sam mu pokazivao na internetu, sve se nadajući...

UČENJE POD DRVETOM

Z. Ć.: E, sad, kažem ti, to je ta vizija, sad sam ja smanjio doživljaj i pokušavam napraviti neku minijaturu. Al’ to je prava utopija.

Z. Ć.: Cijeli taj prostor, sad, iza Accesa, mi kultivišemo… Posadimo šumu, dodamo na ovu postojeću šumu, i onda napraviš prostor velikog parka, koji je ograđen, koji je sređen, skockan, k’o i unutar univerzitetskog kampu-sa, gdje imamo pet hiljada studenata, i u ko-jem, do četiri sata, dođe student, pa ode fino u šumu, pa sjedne tamo, između dva drveta razvuče ležaljku, legne, čita, uči, a dole mu stave panj.

Z. Ć.: E, sad, u cijeloj toj priči, već od tog malog prostora Centra za kulturnu i medijsku dekon-taminaciju, ja pokušavam na izvjestan način mijenjati svijest, gdje u startu nema fashion, nema kladionica; muzika je potpuno drugačija... nema hitova, ništa od toga nema. I radimo nešto što se zove Čajanka kod ludog šeširdžije, u dva navrata smo već doveli mladi bend, koji je vrlo popularan, zovu se Billy Andol...

Z. Ć.: Kažem ti, imam ja dva miliona nekakvih ideja, ono, samo što ja to ne posmatram kao utopiju, znaš. To su neke stvari koje mene zani-maju i koje bi, mislim mogle biti...

MENTALITET UTOPLJEN U MILJACKI

N. K.: Javni prostor direktno korespondira, što je sasvim normalno, sa mentalitetom. Meni je, naprimjer, jedna od najvećih metafora u Sara-jevu rijeka Miljacka. Ne treba ti nikakav šoping mol, ne treba ti nikakav stakleni toranj da bi ti objasnio, jer i bez tornja i bez šoping molova, hipotetički, imaš itekakav simbol mentaliteta i

13

stanja u društvu. To je rijeka koja izgleda kao sve osim kao rijeka. Po tome koliko je zagađena, po tome u kakvom stanju je sve to oko nje samo zakrpljeno da ljudi mogu prelaziti preko mosta; pa se osvijetli tamo nešto. Neki individualni pokušaji nisu zanemarivi, ali rijeka sama po sebi govori da nama ne smeta da ta rijeka ljeti – ži-vim ovdje – smrdi.

N. K.: Pošto sam ja ribar, volio bih da stanem na most na Miljacki i vidim pastrmke. Znaš, volio bih to. To je čisto moja, subjektivna uto-pija. Da vidim… ne mora to sad biti uređeno, da bude neki cirkus, neki kič sa cvijećem, ovo-ono, to je budalaština. Samo ovakva ka-kva jest u ovim gabaritima, al’ da bude potpu-no čista i da vidiš ribe.

X: A koje bi se ribe, onda, lovile ovdje?

N. K.: Imaš ti i one koje mogu živjeti u zagađe-noj vodi. Mislim da se zovu mrenići. To su neke male mrene koje imaju brkove. Mislim… neke iz tog roda soma, nisam baš siguran. Ali pastr-mka ne može, nema šanse, jer ima veoma malu toleranciju na zagađenost.

Y: A, koliko daleko treba da se ode iz grada da bi...

N. K.: Vrlo blizu. Tri kilometra…

Y: Onda, znači, to nije tako veliki problem?

N. K.: Jeste, ogroman je! Skoro je neko radio neku ekološku studiju o tome koliko bi trebalo para da se izmjesti sva kanalizacija i sve otpad-ne vode koje se slijevaju u Miljacku. Osamde-set miliona eura treba. Ogromna lova. Ali za grad, to je opet neki dugoročni projekat. Po-stoji ta studija, vrtila se po portalima. Ja sam je upratio i baš sam je čitao, i vidim neko se bavi i tim pa mi je bilo, ono – nešto će biti, desit će se jednog dana, vjerovatno. (...) Kad bismo dali Japancima, oni bi skontali.

X: ... i imali bismo zlatne ribice.

N. K.: Ne, ne zlatne, nego neke normalne; ništa

egzotično. Znaš onaj vic kad je Mujo uhvatio zlatnu ribicu u Miljacki… Uhvatio Mujo zlatnu ribicu u Miljacki i ona mu kaže „Ispunit ću ti tri želje, nemoj me vraćati“.

SORTIRANO ĐUBRE

F. Š.: Znači, moja utopija je, nekako, izvršena u infrastrukturi. Ono, donosiš smeće, unosiš... plastiku posebno… Kod nas je sve zajedno. Nema uopšte nijanse. (...) Čuj, ono, smeće... ima staklo... Nema to, to je samo kod nas. (...) Utopi-ja bi bila ...

X: ... da ima reciklaža... To je dobra metafora, da je nama i đubre pomiješano...

14

PRINUDNI VIŠAK 3. ZAPOSLENJE:Pravo na odgovarajuće mogućnosti zaposlenja, na učešće u privrednom razvoju i na taj način postizanje lične finansijske nezavisnosti.


Zaposleni – nezaposleni u BiH

Zaposleni

2012 437.331

02-2013 433.439

03-2013 432.853

Nezaposleni

2012 377.707

02-2013 386.432

03-2013 386.091

(Izvor: Federacija Bosne i Hercegovine,

Federalni zavod za statistiku)

POLA SVIJETA NE ZNA ŠTA ĆE SUTRA RADITI

S. R.: Nije bez veze bila ta ’68. To je bila spon-tana godina. Studenti su izašli jer su bili željni promjene. Koliko danas imate mladih ljudi u bilo kojem dijelu svijeta koji ne znaju šta će

sutra… To više nisu postoci od tri, pet, deset posto – 50 posto stanovništva ne zna šta će su-tra raditi. I ne zna gdje im je sigurnost.

S. R.: Možemo pričati o tome šta je starije: želja ili potreba? Da li potreba stvara želju ili želja stvara potrebu? To je tema na kojoj gradiš uto-piju. Kod mene je utopija želja, nije potreba. Jer, ja sam stvorio neku svoju mini želju... imam ja neku svoju utopiju, da sam ja zadovoljan. Ali, ako potreba za utopijom ne postoji, onda ljudi nemaju te želje.

(...)

15

S. R.: Ako uporedim sa vremenom mojih stu-dija… Tada smo išli samo naprijed, a onda smo se naglo okrenuli. Sada idemo naprijed gledajući unazad, a za utopiju treba makar hodati bočno.

EGZISTENCIJALNI MINIMUM

A. H.: U našim sredinama čovjek vrlo brzo postane elitist. U onom momentu kada nismo u stanju da nađemo interes za neobrazovanog, nezainteresovanog, mi smo na neki način isto tako napravili grešku. Na kraju krajeva, mislim, ono što bi najviše pomoglo ovom društvu jest to da ljudi imaju posao. Za onih 70 %, 80 %, ta stabilnost je osnov da bi mogli da imaju neku dodatnu energiju, koja bi se mogla za nešto drugo upotrijebiti. Sad se sva energija koristi na preživljavanje. A to, onda, svede ljudski um na neke primarne aktivnosti mozga.

X: Postoji veliki dio populacije koji je zaposlen, recimo, u državnim institucijama. Ti tamo ne moraš baš da radiš, a dobijaš platu. Čak se oče-kuje, maltene, da ne radiš. Šta je sad to?

A. H.: Šta je to? U Norveškoj je – da se vratimo na tu paralelu – isto tako. Ali, oni imaju pare pa mogu to da podržavaju. A mi nemamo. Ako je nekom sreća u životu to da radi od osam do dva, i da ode kući pa gleda televiziju – po meni, on mora da ima pravo na to. On radi onaj posao koji ti i ja ne želimo da radimo, znači: premješta papire, udara štembilj, piše… Hoću da kažem: ne možemo očekivati da svi imaju istu potrebu i da svi definišu sreću u životu na isti način. Pre-ma tome, nekome je mazohizam potreba a ne-kom je svakodnevnica razumljiva: serija u četiri, serija u sedam, serija u devet. Po meni, u svijetu mora da ima mjesta i za takve ljude, pošto je većina takva.

A. H.: Znači trebamo da nađemo način kako da se postavi ekonomski okvir u kojem neki minimum tih potreba može da bude zadovoljen. Možda je i to utopija.

Y: ... to je blisko socijalizmu koji smo imali.

A. H.: Da. Ali je očigledno da je on bio zasnovan na posuđenim parama.

TRAFIKA SA POGLEDOM NA MORE

Z. Ć.: Tako, otprilike, ta moja utopija ide… da sam ja dao svima deset godina, kad ću ja imati 53, moja žena će imati 53, a moje dijete 18. Mi-slim da će to biti pravo, već u fazi da ja odem i zaposlim se u trafici koja ima pogled na more. I radim tamo… a ostatak svog vremena… nosam kameru i snimam okolo. Zato tražim stalno radno mjesto u trafici s pogledom na more. To mi je, ono, moja prva utopija.

16

STANOVANJE U UZMICANJU

4. STANOVANJE:Pravo na odgovarajuću ponudu i izbor pristupačnog, zdravog stambenog prostora, koji garantuje privatnost i mir.


[...] Cijene nekretnina su u prošlom periodu bile

su pod uticajem globalnih ekonomskih kretanja

zatim i prevelikom nekontrolisanom gradnjom

stanova [to je dovelo do prezasićenosti. Teško

je dati precizan odgovor na predviđanja kre-

tanja cijena nekretnina u narednoj godini jer

tržište nekretnina u Bosni i Hercegovini nije

uređeno, nema dovoljno kontinuirano vođenih

i tačnih statističkih podataka koji mogu dati

precizne informacije o kretanjima cijena, kao

[to je to slučaj u Evropskim zemljama. [...]

(Izvor: Sparkassenekretnine.ba)

INICIJATIVA JE U SOBI ZA ODMOR

S. Ć.: (...) I, onda je pored moje zgrade osvanuo taj Astra club. Ispostavilo se da se gradi kazino sa, kako je registrovano, sobama za odmor na spratu. To je u meni probudilo neki ogromni, impulsivni bijes. Zatim sam se malo raspitala o zakonskoj re-gulativi, pošto je direktno iza objekta osnovna ško-la… Koliko daleko mora biti kazino od osnovne škole, obrazovne, vjerske ili kulturne ustanove… i tako dalje. Sjećam se iz osnovne škole, učili smo da taj dio grada, zbog velikog broja nebodera, ima najveću gustinu naseljenosti. Ustvari, krenulo je potpuno smiješno. Ja sam sastavila jedan pamflet, koji je bio tendenciozno poluprimitivan, jer ja se obraćam ljudima koje će nasekirati ta vrsta pam-fleta: Da li Vi želite živjeti pored „soba za odmor“ i kazina? Ujutro je sve to bilo sistematski uklonjeno. Kada bismo tako efikasni bili oko nekih drugih

stvari, bili bismo Finska, jer je apsolutno, sve i je-dan papir – znači, iz haustora, sa automobila… sve, sve, sve – uklonjen, što je, naravno, u meni probu-dilo još veći bijes. I, onda sam otišla na opštinsko vijeće, sad su tu već počele neke neprijatnosti. Onda je reagovao načelnik, onda je reagovao Ra-dio Sarajevo, reagovao je Sarajevo-X. Ali, pozitivna strana te priče jeste da je nenormalno lako dobiti ogromnu količinu medijskog pokrića za bilo ka-kvu inicijativu u Sarajevu – zato što nema inicija-tiva, što je, na neki način, kod mene probudilo tu neku želju da se malo aktivnije time pozabavim.

MINI-MIDI-MAXI ZAJEDNICE

S. A.: Od ovih se cityija neminovno moraju dići ruke, jer je postalo besmisleno. Nikakvu vi uto-piju – bar ja smatram – ne možete napraviti u tridesetmilionskom konglomeratu. Ona se može napraviti samo lokalno, samo mikro-lokalno – to hoda i to se dešava.

S. A.: Urbanizam je generalno postao utopija. Ukratko, utopija je san. A bolje je sanjati nešto što već mnogo ljudi živi. (...) Znate, u Bosni nema – u Srbiji, nisam čuo – ali Zagreb… Hrva-ti imaju dosta samoodrživih, izdvojenih komu-na raznih tipova. Ti ljudi već žive utopiju.

S. A.: Ja sam još osamdesetih zagovarao takve komunalne zajednice. Postojao bi jedino javni saobraćaj, ukida se privatni… bilo to vozovi…

17

Y: Interesuje me kako se postiže nešto više od tog pojedinca koji živi u svojoj kući; neka grupa, možda, komuna, zajednica… nešto više od tog pojedinca?

S. A.: Kad se spoji više intimnih zajednica u neku midi zajednicu, pa odatle možda u maksi.

S. A.: Ja sam ovdje došao da branim svoj definirani stav o budućnosti. Ubijeđen sam da će se u bu-dućnosti ljudi neminovno morati okrenuti samo-održivim zajednicama. Pošto će tehnološki, fizički, infrastruktura puknuti. Ne može 30 miliona ljudi zajedno živjeti, mora to puknuti. Apsolutno. Zato je budućnost grada u tome da on postaje polis polisa.

X: ... zapravo komšiluci, mahale...

S. A.: Možemo ćaskati?

X: Naravno.

S. A.: Naj, najljepši mali detalj koji sam vidio je onaj kad je pao snijeg, na onom Alipašinom Polju. Bilo je na TV-u: čiste snijeg, dole ljudi, muški i žene, donose čajeve, tacne i ovo-ono, kafice i ‘ajde… Ali fenomenalno je bilo: na nekom, osmom spratu živi muzičar i, sad, on je bolestan; a jedan dole s lopatom, kad se za-mori, on se nasloni i viče: Mujo! De nam jednu! I Mujo izađe sa klarinetom na prozor i fino im odsvira, a ovi dole: E, fala, Mujo… I žene čaj i oni dalje rade... U smislu mikro-mahale je jako moguće tako nešto. Ali ja smatram nemogućim da to bude na nivou kvartova, bilo to u Saraje-vu, Prištini ili Beogradu.

NEXT FUTURE

S. A.: Stvarno, ja stojim iza onoga da mi mora-mo bježati van a nek’ ostanu ovi tu.

S. A.: Jeste li išli nekada iza Butila? Ide se močva-rom i onda počinju lijepe padine? To nije, recimo, mnogo naseljeno. Blizu je, ima odličnu vezu. Ja, kad bih u Sarajevu htio započeti eksperiment komune – ja bih to na onim padinama nakon Butila. Vidi se čitavo Sarajevo, al’ je fino, livada je fino očuvana.

X: Preostaje nam samo komuna kao utopija.

S. A.: To je moje. Ako ste me shvatili, to ostaje moj stav, bogami.

Y: A što niste vi pokrenuli takvu komunu?

S. A.: Jednom davno, ali u jako prozaičnom obliku, prije rata, osamdeset i nekih, sjela naša raja… Već smo svi bili parovi, imali djecu i ovo-ono… I mnogi ljudi su na Palama uzimali zemlju. I par iz te raje je imao gore zemlju… Neki su je imali na moru, ovdje-ondje… A onda, jednom je došao neki bogati seljak, podijelio veliku zemlju i nagovar’o našu raju: hajmo svi tu. Ali to nije u smislu komune… Ali, eto. Nisam nikada pokušao.

X: Ta komuna bi sada morala da ima smisao više u nekom alternativnom edukacionom smislu.

Z: (...) Austrija je puna takvih inicijativa, bau-grupen... To nije utopija, nego je možda uto-pijski. Ima ih i u Francuskoj. Postoji tradicija takvih grupa... to nije toliko neuobičajeno, ali mislim da je suprotno društvenim trendovima.

S. A.: Mi već vidimo da će u sljedećoj budućnosti eksplozija stanovništva i ekspanzija novih teh-nologija zaustaviti razvoj grada kakav znamo (...) U budućnosti to neće biti moguće. (...) To ove ideje čini utopijom.

18

LIMITIRANI PROTOK5. KRETANJE:Pravo na neometano kretanje i slobodu putovanja; na harmoničnu ravnotežu između svih korisnika ulice – javnog prevoza, privatnih automobila, pješaka i biciklista.

Evropska deklaracija o urbanim pravima, iz evropske povelje o gradu

[...] Šest zemalja članica EU zatražilo je u okto-

bru (2012.) da se, u slučaju zloupotrebe, drža-

vama Zapadnog Balkana ukine bezvizni režim

koji podrazumijeva slobodu putovanja u zemlje

Schengen zone. Predstavnici Evropskog vijeća,

Evropske komisije (EK) i Evropskog parlamenta

(EP) nisu se uspjeli dogovoriti oko mehanizma

za suspenziju bezviznog režima za zemlje Za-

padnog Balkana. [...]

(Izvor: Source.ba)

[...] Specifičnost do koje će doći po ulasku Hr-

vatske u EU jest i to da će dio građana BiH imati

putnu ispravu s kojom će se slobodno moći kre-

tati po teritoriju EU i imati lakši pristup npr. obra-

zovnim institucijama unutar EU, dok će ostalim

građanima to kretanje i pristup biti otežan. Time

se, dodatno stvara podjela unutar građana BiH i u

ovom slučaju treba biti na oprezu da se posjedo-

vanje “europskog pasoša-putovnice” ne pretvori

u elitizaciju dijela građana BiH. [...]

(Izvor: Radiosarajevo.ba)

STANICA BEZ VOZOVA

X: Samo na primjeru Željezničke stanice ti za-pravo vidiš stanje te infrastrukture.

F. Š.: Ona djeluje monumentalno, baš je spomenik, a potpuno je disfunkcionalna; mislim, nema vozova.

X: Arhitektonski je ona važna, i taj arhitekta je važan, i čak ima taj najveći svod, da li na Balka-nu ili u bivšoj Jugoslaviji.

F. Š.: Zar nije tamo bio neki… festival elektron-ske muzike?

X: To je bilo poslije rata.

F. Š.: To u onom zlatnom vremenu iza rata?

X: Zlatno vrijeme iza rata, da… ali u ratu su tamo, recimo, bile izbjeglice.

F. Š.: U Stanici?

19

X: U Stanici. I nakon toga su bili beskućnici koji su živjeli u vagonima i u tom zdanju.

I BEZ VIZA STATIČNO

S. M.: Mi sada toliko pričamo o bezviznim re-žimima da je to dovedeno do apsurda. Evo, sad nema viza. Putujemo li mi ko mahniti? Ne pu-tujemo. Prosto, ko živi u Varešu, ostao je da gaji svoj špinat u Varešu. Čuj, ne idem u Berlin na Berlinale… Ne idem, prosto ne idem. I sad is-pada, dakle, da bismo mi svi išli na Berlinale, pa bismo svi išli na Fashion Week u Pariz, pa bismo išli svi u Louvre, pa vježbali... petkom i subotom.

MOJE MIKROSREDINE

S. M.: Mislim da je način na koji mi percipiramo realnost malo iskrivljen. Odnosno, i naravno, krećemo se u malom, mi živimo u mikro-sferama. Razumiješ, ja živim na relaciji… Moj stan na Do-lac-Malti – to mi je jedna mikro-sfera, gdje je neki komšiluk s kojim pijem kafu, rakiju, nedjeljom naveče… Onda imam posao, pa mi poslije posla odemo u Tito na pivo – to mi je druga mikro-sre-dina… Nekad subotom zaglaviš u Babilonu – što ti je treća mikro-sredina. I, prosto, ja ostale sredi-ne ne poznajem, razumiješ. Restoran na Ilidži, pa s polugolim pjevaljkama sjediti do ujutru – nikad. To je meni dalje od Argentine. Znaš, u Argentinu ću možda otići, al’ tamo sigurno neću.

METRO – SCIENCE FICTION

F. Š.: Neki penzioner, recimo Ramo, Ramović. Njega je jako kopkao taj problem gradskog sao-braćaja. I, onda je on izmislio male heliodrome. Ima čitavu teoriju: gdje bi ti heliodromi bili, kako da se ljudi prevoze… To je njegova futuri-stička vizija.

X: Napravio je kao knjigu?

F. Š.: Da, tu je sve opis’o. A sam je to i odštamp’o, ima i predgovor koji je on sam napis’o, naravno. Sve je u duhu njega samog.

F. Š.: Sada, kad bih ja imao te neke bukvalne vizije.

Meni se sviđa metro u Beču… Uopšte nemaš osjećaj da je to vremenski, da postoji vrijeme, prostor. Ti pržiš, brži si… prolaziš prostorom jako brzo. Dogovoriš se s nekim za pet minuta s jednog kraja Beča na drugi… U Sarajevu je to, recimo, nemoguće. Nemaš gdje, malo je. Neko bi rekao šta će ti metro, do Ilidže bi bilo jedno četiri-pet metro stanica. (...) Metro bi ovdje bio science fiction.

BEZ DOMINACIJE AUTOMOBILA

N. N. Č.: U ta prva dva dana elementarne ne-pogode, proglašene zbog snijega, grad je bio tako živ. I zrak je bio tako čist... Godinama nam govore o tome da smo najzagađeniji grad zbog loženja. Tog dana se sasvim sigurno puno ložilo, ali nije bilo automobila...

N. N. Č.: Moja ideja bi bila da ovaj uži dio grada bude bez automobila, sa jačim javnim prosto-rom. Ne javni prostor u kojem se može kupova-ti. (Naravno, to podrazumijeva veliki broj garaža koje se nalaze izvan toga i jako dobar i sigurniji javni prevoz nego što ga sada imamo.) Sa funk-cionalnom, dobrom željezničkom stanicom, sa funkcionalnom i dobrom autobuskom stanicom – gdje bi, praktično, sve što danas imamo, isto tako, bilo pristupačno ali ne na onaj način da skoro autom uđem u prodavnicu gdje nešto tre-ba da kupim. Mislim da bi takav jedan koncept doveo do drugačijih odnosa. Mada ja ne pričam prvenstveno s nekog ekološkog aspekta, moglo bi da se priđe svemu ovome i tako. (...) Nisam ja tu a priori protiv korištenja automobila, već ja cijelo to prekomjerno korištenje automobila do-življavam kao jednu demonstraciju moći i jednu nepotrebnu komociju u mnogim situacijama.

N. N. Č.: Mogao bi to značiti i početak građenja nekakve biciklističke kulture i ovdje. A bilo bi lijepo da uz svako brdo, recimo na kilometar, imaju stepenice ili eskalator... Ima puno ta-kvih gradova. Naprimjer, Herceg-Novi ima te stepenice...

Y : U Medelinu, u Kolumbiji, napravili su žičaru i eskalatore kao javni prijevoz i do tih nepristu-pačnih brda. Upravo to što pričaš.

20

DIJAGNOSTIKA BLAGOSTANJA

6. ZDRAVLJE:Pravo na životnu sredinu i spektar ustanova koje doprinose fizičkom i psihičkom zdravlju.


Sigurno je da specifične okolnosti življenja gra-

đana Sarajeva u periodu rata (1992-1995) imaju

zdravstvene, sociološke, duhovno-religijske,

materijalne i političke dugoročne implikaci-

je na život svakog pojedinca u našoj zemlji.

Projekat istraživanja zastupljenosti simptoma

posttraumatskog stresnog poremećaja (PTSP)

kod stanovnika Kantona Sarajevo predstav-

ljao je važan dio aktivnosti zacrtanih Akcio-

nim planom Programa praćenja, prevencije

i liječenja demobilisanih branilaca i članova

njihovih porodica od PTSP-a u Kantonu Sara-

jevo za period 2008-2012. [...] Kvalitativnom

analizom odgovora koji su svrstani u četrnaest

kategorija primijećeno je da su najzastupljeniji

traumatski događaji u svim dobnim uzrastima

gubitak i ranjavanje značajne druge osobe,

lišavanje osnovnih životnih potreba i ratište. U

ispitivanom uzorku 18,6% ispitanika je ispoljilo

vrlo izražene znake posttraumatskog stresnog

poremećaja, kod 63% su ti simptomi bili bla-

gi ili umjereni, a 18% ispitanika nema nikakve

simptome u vezi sa ratnom traumom. Veća

zastupljenost simptoma vezanih za intruzije

prisutna je kod žena, dok kod muškaraca pre-

valiraju simptomi iz skupine izbjegavanja situa-

cija koje podsjećaju ili su povezane sa traumat-

skim događajem. Multipli karakter traumatskih

događaja, te neuobičajeno veliki broj građana

Sarajeva (82%) koji su u ovom istraživanju imali

neki sa stresom povezani simptom, nedvoj-

beno potvrđuju razornost, brutalnost i atipič-

nost ovog rata i njegove nesagledive štetne

posljedice za sve narode koji žive u Bosni i

Hercegovini.

(Izvor: Ministarstvo zdravstva Kantona Sarajevo)

MENTALNA BANJA

S. A.: Imam jedan raniji rad koji se zove Kula za alternativnu prevenciju mentalnog zdravlja. Konsultovao sam i psihologe i psihijatre. Penjete se gore, i ona vas raznim načinima, poznatim ili novim, oslobađa stresova, šokova; sve je lagano, pa onda sve oštrije. I na kraju, kada se izađe gore na vrh kule, onda možete da vrištite.

X: To nama, znači, treba za traumu...

21

Y: A kako bi to moglo da funkcioniše danas?

S. A.: Danas... Daleko lakše nego tada.

RATNI FILM U GLAVAMA

N. K.: Ja mislim da se u ovoj državi glavna tema, tema rata, otvara na pogrešan način; da se njo-me manipuliše, da se manipuliše ljudskim gu-bicima, stanjem nekakve dugotrajne boli. A da nikad nisu činjenice postavljene na sto.

X: A, je l’, onda, taj rat bio utopija, jesmo mi odradili, onda, tu svoju utopiju?

N. K.: Ima pored ostalih perspektiva i takve neke perspektive, da je bio i utopijski...

N. K.: Ali, znaš kad znaš da trauma rovi po ljud-skoj duši? Kad ljudi kažu Kakav film praviš? a ti kažeš da je o ratu – Joj, nemoj više filmova o ratu, toliko je, kažu, tih filmova o ratu. Ne zato što je previše filmova, nego što je ratni film u glavama ljudi, a te filmove niko nije downloa-dirao iz njihovih glava. Ne mislim na filmove u filmskom smislu nego na priče, na njihovu tegobu, na ono kroz šta su prošli; to nije nikad izvučeno iz njih na adekvatan način, nego se sa tim manipuliše na masovnim... dženazama... Samo malo da se vatra održava, da se ta ravna temperatura nacionalizma održava.

KAPSULA ZA SAMOSASTAVLJANJE

X: Jesmo li mi još uvijek u toj opsadi? Treba li nama utopija da bismo izašli iz te opsade? Zašto nećeš da misliš o budućnosti, što je toliko to strašno?

F. Š.: Teška su ti pitanja… Šta ja znam, sad ja tre-bam… otići u fikciju. (...) Ja, kad pišem knjigu… taj, neki moj, čovjek… njega moraš izmisliti. Recimo, njegova glavna opsesija je to što mu je neko poginuo, on se bavi gubicima i tim prosto-rom. To je problem mnogih ljudi, zato je meni to bitno. I znači, on je, sad, savladao traumu, nekako. Shvatio je nešto… OK. Al’ kad je doš’o do te tačke onda je skont’o, pa dobro, šta sad? Da

nije bilo rata opet bi im’o neku veliku traumu. Znači, tranzicije, prelazak iz socijalizma u neki divlji kapitalizam. Opet bi im’o nešto.

F. Š.: I, onda taj lik kaže da smatra da svi ljudi treba da napišu knjigu, ne samo pisci. Ne mora to biti knjiga, to su metafore, naravno. To može biti crtež… bilo šta, ne znam, intervju… Jedna ogromna knjiga koja bi imala neke ljekovite moći, koja bi povezivala fragmente tvog života, kojom bi se ljudi sastavljali. Ta knjiga, ona nije fizička...

X: Znači, nama, zapravo treba …

F. Š.: Vremenska kapsula... Dođeš ko Dr. Who, klikneš… i, putuješ, i vraćaš se. I skontaš… takav si – kakav si. (...) Ne znam, po meni je to – to. Ja sam stalno patio: kako to sad, moja kuća od prije rata… stan. Ja sam to sve rekonstruis’o... taj me lik počeo rekonstruisati. Pa on kaže: kad se uđe u stan – bukvalno – ovdje stoje kljove ne-kog vepra kojeg je ubio njegov otac u godini kad se on rodio, ‘vamo se ide u WC, tamo… pločice, u WC-u je uvijek ledeno… ne znam… prozor iz WC-a gleda na živo zelenilo nekog vrta iza, ‘vamo je spavaća soba, ‘vamo TV, ‘vamo su ka-sete, knjige, ‘vamo neki sto, neka pisma, erotski časopisi… neki regali… Treba mi, ono, sto hi-ljada riječi samo da opišem sobu. Dobro, to je Proust, u potrazi za izgubljenim svim.

22

X: Da li je to, ta prošlost nekako, to resetovanje, zapravo, o kojem mi svi govorimo, tipično za Sarajevo? Za Bosnu, za to neko iskustvo?

F. Š.: I za Hrvatsku i za Srbiju, svugdje… To im je duplja u sistemu, što bi rek’o narod… Ali, nije meni to direktno povezano s ratom.

F. Š.: Znaš zašto je meni to bitno… Taj lik… On ima projekcije budućnosti, on se bavi ovim samo u tom svom malom gradu… U jednom snu on šeta sa sestrom i pada neki snijeg, i tu se pojavi neki tramvaj… E, to je sad ta želja da nešto bude i ljepše nego što jeste – zato što je taj grad ruševina. I on hoda i sve, nešto, ono, super, znaš. Ta rijeka tu je prelijepa ali nije plovna i sad, on, kao, kaže bilo bi super da ta rijeka bude plovna, jer onda bi se grad otvorio prema hilja-du nekih kosmopolitskih mogućnosti. Rijeka bi dovela sa sobom brodove, mornare, i tako dalje. To je bukvalno nekakva utopija. Ali, on onda kaže kad zaranja: gdje god ode, kad ima slike budućnosti uvijek se vraća u prošlost. Jer jedno-stavno mora konstruisati.

F. Š.: (…) Eto, ja bih napravio neku kabinu, boks – to bi bio čisti science fiction – u kojoj bi imao 3D holograme i u kojoj bi se svako suočav’o sa svojim problemom. Ne mora biti prošlost. (...) Nešto kao Minority Report sa svojim pričama. Znači... dodiruješ... Trebali ste mi reći pet dana prije da se pripremim. Mogao sam to opisati: dođeš, uđeš, pozvoniš...

F. Š.: Ustvari bih ja pravio utopiju gdje bi se ljudi bukvalno morali stalno vraćati u prošlost. Nji-hova bi utopija bila da se pomire... Znači, to je neka moja opsesija. Recimo sad, Busovača, mali grad, sat vremena odavde. To je podijeljeni grad, mislim, nije bukvalno. Za te male gradove, na-pravio bih te male kapsule ljudima, ali njihova budućnost bi stalno bila prošlost.

F. Š.: Nije to ništa loše. Neće to dugo trajati... ograničeno... Pazi, tim malim ljudima – nisam u njihovim umovima – al, znam ih od prije rata, družio sam se s ljudima... Nemaju ti oni, čovječe, nekih vizija... kao neki… Nisu naravno

ljudi jednaki. Njegova vizija je, ne znam, da mu daš čiste čarape u ratu, da on jede. Ma razmišlja on, ima on emocija, svašta on ima... al’ sve su to tako minimalni prohtjevi. Pa, čovječe, tim običnim ljudima, ne treba njima puno... da se vrate, da se to riješi. Ono, ne znam... kažu: mi smo ove ubili ovdje, ovi su ubili ove ovdje. Sad, kad bi mi sve to napravili, hologramski... odmah ti kažeš: e, vidi sad ovo... evo snimci BBC-a. On kaže, dobro, vjerujem, ja sam mor’o, bio sam tu, nisam puc’o. Ovaj kaže, ja jesam. Onda neko sučeljavanje.

X: U Engleskoj, i to baš u tim programima na televiziji koje svi gledamo, ima super emisija koja se zove The Worst Jobs in History. I, sad je bila jedna epizoda o srednjevjekovnom zanima-nju sin eater (jedač grijeha). Ta osoba, obično najodbačenija od cijelog sela, zapravo je morala da sa mrtvaca pojede sol i komad hljeba, koje su ostavljani da prenoće na mrtvacu. Time bi preuzela sve grijehove od te osobe, koja bi se na taj način oslobađala. Eto, ti komadići hljeba nisu nekako mogli biti bačeni, nego ih je neko morao pojesti, preraditi u sebi. Ta kapsula je zapravo neki moderni sin eater.

F. Š.: Da. Jedač. Al’ mora biti interaktivna, čak ne znam bi l’ Dr. Who, vremenski lord, pomog’o...

Y: Nego, šta se desi sa društvom u kojem ljudi prođu kroz tu kapsulu? Kakvo je društvo poslije toga?

F. Š.: Ta kapsula, ona već postoji, naravno, al’ trajat će to puno, čovječe. Kapsula je ogromna, ona je vremenski razvučena.

23

PARAOLIMPIJADA SLOBODNOG VREMENA

7. SPORT I SLOBODNO VRIJEME:Pravo svim osobama, bez obzira na uzrast, mogućnosti ili prihode, na pristup širokom spektru sportskih i rekreativnih sadržaja.


[...] Svaki put kada se spomenu mine sjetim se

činjenice da nam je agresija iz susjedne Srbi-

je uz živote nevinih ljudi i uništene gradove

ukrala i mnoge prirodne ljepote, a među njima

i Trebević. Uništena je ona draga rasklimana i

strašiva trebevićka žičara, a omiljeno izletište

Sarajlija prekriveno je minama. Nema više onog

dječijeg uzbuđenja dok se od Pivare penjemo

basamcima ka platou gdje nas dočekuje bru-

janje velikih kolutova i zvuk plavih i crvenih

kućica koje se ljuljaju na prilazu platformi.

Nema onog uzbuđenja dok čekamo da dođe

naš red da uskočimo u onu slatku kutijicu, te

da se lijepo isprepadamo do izlaska... Nema

brojanja stubova... Nema one slatke strepnje

kada žičara stane na onoj najvišoj tački... Nema

onih strašivih natpisa na misterioznoj kutiji za

slučaj opasnosti gdje je pisalo: pažnja, attenti-

on i achtung... Nema scena kako roditelji koji u

žičari tješe prepadnutu djecu odmah na izlazu

pale cigare... Nema žamora na Vidikovcu, Prvog

šumara, sankališta na Brusu, botaničke bašte,

šetnje do vrha, osmijeha planinara i dječijeg

smijeha... Nema onog prelijepog pogleda iz sa-

rajevske žičare na Sarajevo ni radosti povratka

u grad. Kao da je i samo sjećanje na Trebević

prekriveno minama. Zbilja, bez Trebevića i one

žičare sarajevske, subote i nedjelje su izgubile

jedan od najljepših sadržaja. Nove generacije

ne znaju šta im je ukradeno, a nama ostaju uz-

dasi – baš poput onih uzdaha kada bi na žičari

nestalo struje dok smo na onom mjestu gdje

je visina bila najviša...To je bilo na onim nekim

stubovima prije samog vrha... Da je samo to bila

posljedica agresije bilo bi previše. Jedino, što

me tješi je onaj osjećaj kada struja dođe i žičara

se ponovno pokrene. Zamišljam tu scenu. Eh,

koja je to sreća. Ako Bog da i inšallah.

(Sjećanje: sjećanje na Trebević – prekriveno

minama! Blob.blogger.ba)

24

UZMI PARK U SVOJE RUKE

S. Ć.: Ima jedan super park, koji čiko brani puškom. To je stvarno, bez imalo cinizma, vjerovatno najbolja stvar koja se desila u tom naselju Hrasno. Tu su četiri nebodera i, gene-ralno, nije se naselje proslavilo zelenim povr-šinama. Ispred jednog od tih nebodera bila je neka, uslovno rečeno, travnata površina, više neki pijesak. I tu je stajao stari kamion, a on je to stopostotno uzeo u svoje ruke. On je bivši borac, sada stay at home dad – nezaposleni otac, sa jednim ili dvoje djece, a žena nešto studira ili radi. I, on je napravio malo čudo, čak je pretjerao, otišao korak dalje sa tim parkom. Mislim, kad to drveće naraste da će to biti džungla, tuda se neće uopšte moći proći. Ruč-no je napravio i šedrvan i neki nestvarni hlad.

S. Ć.: Interesantno je i to da vrlo agresivno brani taj park. Razmišljala sam, ali super: on je očito zaposjeo javni prostor i ne samo to – nego ga i uredio sto posto po svom vlastitom nahođenju. Još su ga prepoznali ljudi, pa mu donose dona-cije, sadnice; i još ga zove načelnik: kao, ‘ajde, uredi i ovu površinu. (...) Znaš, ja ne bih donije-la tu Snježanu da ga ja uređujem, al’ šta sad kad nisam ja sredila park, tako da čovjek ima stopo-stotno pravo da dovuče Snježanu od, ne znam, dvanaest metara.

...

S. Ć.: Ustvari, možda to nije model koji bismo htjeli. (…) Svi govore o nedostatku zakona u državi, ne jednom uđem u taksi i čujem: Al’ to je zato što mi nemamo državu.

25

ZAPUŠTENA KULTIVACIJA

8. KULTURA:Pravo na pristup i učešće u širokom spektru kulturnih i kreativnih aktivnosti i interesovanja.


Zbog neriješenog pravnog statusa i problema

sa financiranjem „sedam kulturnih institucija

od državnog značaja“ je pred apsolutnim ga-

šenjem/nestajanjem. Zemaljski muzej Bosne

i Hercegovine, Historijski muzej Bosne i Her-

cegovine, Nacionalna i univerzitetska biblio-

teka Bosne i Hercegovine, Muzej književnosti

i pozorišne umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine,

Umjetnička galerija Bosne i Hercegovine, Bi-

blioteka sa slijepa i slabovidna lica Bosne i

Hercegovine i Kinoteka Bosne i Hercegovine,

zatvaraju svoja vrata “za javnost”, nastavljajući

djelovati u hladnim kancelarijama i depoima,

dok plate uposlenicima kasne i po godinu

dana. Razlog tomu leži prvenstveno u činje-

nici da se ni jedan nivo vlasti države Bosne

i Hercegovine nije zvanično očitovao o ovim

institucijama, iako je to Daytonskim sporazu-

mom (1995.) predviđeno. Političar koji je, pak,

najodgovorniji za djelovanje sedam institucija,

Sredoje Nović (SNSD-ov kadar), ministar civil-

nih poslova u drugom mandatu koji je komplet-

nu situaciju prokomentirao: “Ako neko misli da

je BiH samo Sarajevo ili da je jedna institucija

značajna za BiH onda se grdno vara. Jer, onda

ćemo reći da su ljudi u Sarajevu ili Banja Luci

važniji od onih u Mostaru ili Doboju i mislim da

je to potpuno pogrešan pristup”.


ĆORSOKAK

A. T.: Imaš institucije kao što je Zemaljski mu-zej, koji će uvijek postojati; sad postoji samo problem njegovog održavanja, lošeg upravljanja. Mada dosta ljudi ne zna uopšte čemu to služi, pogotovo, recimo Historijski muzej, Olimpijski muzej ili Muzej književnosti i pozorišne um-jetnosti. Slabe su posjete i slaba je prezentacija. Takođe, oni nisu ničiji prioritetni interes, a to su institucije koje je formirala država. Država ovdje samoj sebi nije interes. Ona je nešto što nema snage ni da se uruši ni da opstane, zombi, pa taj izgled onda dobija i sve ono što je ona osnovala.

A. T.: (...) Ako ćemo pričati o utopiji onda možemo pričati o nekim izuzetno entuzijastičkim pojedinci-ma, od restauratora umjetničkih djela koji su džaba restaurirali po Umjetničkoj galeriji… Do recimo ovog paradoksa: 1909., Bosna i Hercegovina je bila rasparčana, bukvalno, poslije Aneksije, a rad Ze-maljskog muzeja nikad nije bio doveden u pitanje, da se, eto, kaže: aha, Muzej reprezentuje srpsku i hrvatsku kulturu, pa nema tu ništa bosansko. Cijela je država bila dovedena u pitanje, a nikad rad Ze-maljskog muzeja. Dakle, mi smo sad u goroj po-ziciji: dovodi se u pitanje rad te institucije jer ona, tobože, ne reprezentuje na adekvatan način sve narode ovdje. (...) Mi imamo taj problem što smo mi država naroda a ne građana... Desila se terito-rijalizacija unutar države i kad se to desi onda je sljedeći korak da se pravi nacija-država što se, opet, ne može desiti i onda smo stalno u ćorsokaku.

26

SJEĆANJE I ZABORAV

N. N. Č.: Razmišljala sam, recimo što se Zemalj-ski muzej ne otvori i s druge strane...

X: ... iz bašte...

N. N. Č.: Postoji već jako dugo u drugim drža-vama koncept tih reformi muzeja, da se stvarno ima jedan pravi odnos prema tome. Mislim, u ovome trenutku, čitava situacija sa muzejima – da sad ne pričamo o tome koliko kultura znači unutar države – jeste i neka kriza sjećanja. Kažu da se sjećanje sastoji od pamćenja i zaborava, tako da zaborav jeste dio sjećanja.

SMIJEM LI JA OVDJE UĆI?

S. Ć.: Imamo problem sa autoritetom. Čak i ja kad prolazim pored Zemaljskog muzeja, Mu-zeja revolucije, tih institucija, nekako se pitam: Mogu li ja ovdje ući? Smijem li ja ovdje ući? Je l’ ovo otvoreno? Hoće li me neko nešto pitati? Osjećam to neko neosnovano strahopoštova-nje prema tom prostoru, dok prema njihovim ekvivalentima u inostranstvu, nemam tog strahopoštovanja. Znači, nije stvar u meni i u doživljaju muzeja, javnog prostora, već u njiho-vom doživljaju samih sebe... Osjećaj slobode, da si ravnopravni korisnik, stvar je menadžmenta, feelinga koji stvaraš u instituciji, koji omogućava stvarno okupiranje javnog prostora. I onda sam razmišljala o njujorškoj Public Library, gdje ljudi redovno dođu da ručaju, da jedu svoje sendviče.

GLINAMOL

X: Tvoja se utopija, ustvari, svodi na odnose među ljudima.

Z: A kakva je promjena potrebna... da bi utopija postala stvarnost?

S. M.: Ja mislim da je blokira obrazovni sistem, kurikulum... Ja radim na univerzitetu, u terci-jarnom obrazovanju, i mislim da smo mi naj-nebitnija karika – jer meni dolaze već odrasli, pismeni ljudi. Kad ti dobiješ tu neku amorfnu masu, koju tek neko treba da oblikuje, taj neki

glinamol… Kako vrijeme prolazi, kroz obrazov-ni sistem mi dobijamo neke mermere. Prosto, isklesati taj mermer je stvarno problem. Znači, dok imaš glinamol, ti s njim ništa ne radiš. Malo ga kao oblikuješ, samo da se uklopi u neku ma-tricu, k’o Kentucky Fried Chicken – svi bataci isti. I onda ga gurneš u rernu i zapečeš.

S. M.: Ja želim biti glinamol do kraja života, od-nosno – da ništa nije zakovano. Svaka izjava se može dovesti u sumnju, uključujući i ovu. Dakle, mi prosto nismo navikli da sumnjamo, mi na univerzitetu nemamo razvijenu priču o kritič-kom mišljenju.

S. M.: Škole ne trebaju biti hramovi znanja. One moraju biti agore. E, kad shvatimo da je obrazovni sistem agora a ne hram, tu dolazi do potpune promjene koncepta promišljanja i onda smo spremni za dijalog. Do tog momenta mi ćemo biti robovi sistema.

S. M.: Evo, mi smo nedavno imali jedan super projekat koji se zove Škola koju volim i bili smo raspisali poziv za radove, tražeći da nam profe-sori u školama, odgajatelji, razredne starješine (starješina, kakva riječ!) napišu i pošalju priču o tome šta rade drugačije sa djecom a da ne treba 43 ziliona maraka iz budžeta. Prosto, šta vi to radite? Meni je favorit Mješovita srednja škola iz Kalesije (prehrambeni smjer), oni su moj vrh... Skontala djeca da iza škole ima neka livada, uzorali su oni tu livadicu, zasadili svega. Pazi, to je već interakcija između njih i nastavnika, oni se druže...

X: Rade.

S. M.: To je neka super sinergija. Pola prinosa daju besplatno, za neke karitase i merhame-te – razumiješ, za pučke kuhinje, za narodne kuhinje – pola prodaju i od tih para odu na ekskurziju. E, to je meni škola. Onda, iskopamo tu super jednu profesoricu iz Trebinja, iz neke gimnazije. Ona je profesorica srpskog jezika i književnosti i ona s klincima radi Antigonu. Ona se toliko pretvori u nekog freaka da je počela da pronalazi CD-ove sa antičkom muzikom: kako

27

to zvuči, kakva je bila hrana, šta su jeli u antici, ručali, doručkovali… Razumiješ... Pošto sad ima ta crkva Gračanica, na jednom brdu iznad Trebinja, tamo je izgrađen amfiteatar koji gleda na Trebišnjicu… I ona hoće djecu da uvede u amfiteatar da u togama izvedu Antigonu.

S. M.: Onda, recimo, profesor fizike skontao da ta djeca tu fiziku baš ne gotive i on je shvatio da je nastava ne samo to da djeca dođu u školu nego i to da on ode tamo gdje su djeca. On do-bar dio nastave izvodi preko Facebooka. Prosto je shvatio da su oni tamo i onda je i on otišao tamo.

POZITIVNI TRANSFER ZNANJA

S. K.: Uvijek sam u dilemi s ovim gradom. Mno-ge osobine ovog grada i mentaliteta stvarno ne volim, nisu mi bliske, a mislim da su nepromje-njive. A, s druge strane, sve te iste osobine daju strahovito dobre učinke u nekim situacijama, kad treba da se okupi oko nečega. Ali, po meni, sve ono što se ne nastavlja, nego se ugasi, nije pozitivno. Znači, ako se već toliko slavi Olim-pijada, ne slavi se ona bezveze. Ona, vjerovatno označava najsvjetlije momente pobjede karakte-ra, duhovitosti, uma, inteligencije i sposobnosti ovog grada da može da izvede najzahtjevnije događaje i da odgovori tom zadatku u pot-punosti i da istog momenta sleti sa te visine, da naplati Kirku Douglasu petsto dolara viski i da sve to sami dovedu u pitanje, sruše i da dugo ne postoji ništa. Tako se desilo i sa Opsadom, gdje je, zapravo, način na koji mi pristupamo njenom dokumentovanju i istraživanju stra-hovito veličanje ljudskog karaktera i ljudskog uma. Ja sam se uvijek ograničavala da kažem da bi to, vjerovatno, u svakom gradu bilo isto, jer je ljudska priroda univerzalna, kao i um. I on na određene okolnosti reaguje na vrlo sličan način. Ali ta se opsada desila nama, znači, mi imamo tu jedinstvenu poziciju da je ovaj grad imao takvu istoriju. Ljudi su pokazali zavidnu količinu kreacije, sposobnosti samoodržanja u kreativnom, duhovitom smislu. Znači, mi bismo postali grad kojem nije bilo premca u svijetu, da smo taj bazični kreativni potencijal razvili,

nadgradili na globalnu, univerzalnu situaciju. To se nije dogodilo. Naprotiv. Opet je taj mentalitet pao, a opstanak je ostao kao način života, ali je pervertirao do te mjere da postaje strašno opa-san i nepodnošljiv.

S. K.: Ako uspijemo napraviti Muzej opsade Sarajeva, on bi bio model pozitivnog transfera znanja, univerzalnih, humanističkih vrijedno-sti, gdje se veliča um, karakter, talenat, ljudska priroda. Znači, mi smo, zapravo, nada za čovje-čanstvo. Tu je četiri godine dokaza o tome, bez obzira na onaj mentalitet prije i poslije. I Kuba ima svoj dokaz, kako je moguće opstati, a tebi je nekako lakše u životu, da se suočiš, ako znaš da je neko već kroz to prošao.

PROPLAMSAJ KRITIKE

N. J.: Vjerujte, kada pročitam tekst koji je dobro argumentiran, za mene je to proplamsaj uto-pije. Zaista, sama mogućnost te kritike, kritike koja se ne saplete na jednoj kartici teksta dok ne dođe do svoga kraja, za mene je u ovakvim okolnostima već uspjeh. Takva kritika i takva argumentacija, ona se, po pravilu, ne nalazi na strani neke hegemone ideologije, ona ne mora da troši energiju na opravdavanje same sebe, na dokazivanje svojih vrijednosti. (...) Izađe Reis na crveni tepih i izvali – to je to. Tu nema argu-menta. Imate stav jednog čovjeka utemeljen ni u čemu drugom do u njegovom institucionalnom autoritetu, dok sada zaista svaka argumentirana kritika je, po meni, utopija u praksi.

X: Šta je korak nakon toga?

N. J.: Ne znam. Ko to može znati? To naprosto ne možeš znati.

N. J.: Uvijek se podrazumijeva neka promjena nabolje. Ako nije nabolje, onda je na nešto dru-gačije. Hajmo vidjeti kako bi bilo da nije ovako kako je sada. Kako je sada očigledno nam ne va-lja. To je neka pretpostavka. Svaka kritika kreće od toga. (...) Vrijednost se tu dobija upravo kroz razmišljanje, kroz kritičku refleksiju a ne kroz neku zacrtanu teleologiju.

28

KOSMIČKA POLITIKA9. MULTIKULTURNA INTEGRACIJA:Gdje zajednice različitih kulturnih, etničkih i religioznih opredjeljenja vode miran suživot.


Izjava Angele Merkel da je u zapadnoj Europi

multikulturalizam u izumiranju, bila je povod

za promišljanje profesora sa različitih bosan-

skohercegovačkih univerziteta o tome da li je

multikulturalnost, kojom se BiH dičila deceni-

jama, izumrla i u BiH. Profesori sa više univer-

ziteta u BiH smatraju da je multikulturalnost

istrošena – ili čak mrtva i u BiH, te da će proces

traženja identiteta potrajati još dugo. Profesor

Mile Lasić, sa Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta

u Mostaru, smatra da je multikulturalnost mrtva

u BiH. “Ovdje se radi o tomu da je s radošću

dočekana tvrdnja prime ministera Camerona i

kancelarke Merkel kako je navodno došlo do

smrti multikulturalizma na Zapadu, kako bi se

prikrilo, ustvari, da je ovdje ubijen multikultura-

lizam i da su nastajala paralelna društva. U tom

nastanku paralelnih društava od gotovine se

napravila veresija, od elemenata suživota kojeg

smo imali u pokojnoj Jugoslaviji u svim postju-

goslavenskim zemljama nastala su paralelna

društva, pri čemu su puno više nastradali svi

koji su manjinci u većinskom okruženju, a po-

gotovu stvarni manjinci, dakle nacionalne ma-

njine koje su dvostruko kažnjene. I to se htjelo.

I u tome krivicu snose ne samo političke nego

duhovne, sveučilišne, univerzitetske ekipe koje

reproduciraju poželjni govor i stvaraju poželjnu

sliku. Zatim, krivci su religijske zajednice koje su

se upustile u dosluh s politikama, što je užasno

škodilo i vjeri, a o politici, suživotu i multikul-

turalnom društvu da i ne govorimo. U svakom

slučaju, nastala je smrt multikulturalizma u po-

stjugoslavenskim zemljama“, smatra profesor

Lasić. Sličnog razmišljanja je i profesor Nerzuk

Ćurak, sa sarajevskog Univerziteta, koji kaže

da se multikulturalnost sistematski uništavala

u posljednje dvije decenije, što je rezultiralo

činjenicom da je BiH danas „država koja postoji

kroz svoje nepostojanje i ne postoji kroz svoje

postojanje”. [...]

(Izvor: Vijesti.ba)

29

ZAŠTO NEMA KINEZA?

F. Š.: Ja stalno želim da odem iz Sarajeva. Da ostvarim svoju utopiju, štogod ona bila... Do-bro, sad si stariji, nemaš ti onda volje da se prilagođavaš novom gradu. (...) Kad dođem u neki grad koji kasnije volim, prvo ga mrzim, sve govorim: joj, ja ne mogu ovdje. U Berlinu, kontam, kako ću ja živjeti ovdje? Joj, vidi kakvi su ovi, joj, užas, emigracija, Turci, tužno, jadno, prljavo. A Sarajevo je kao super čisto. Al’ strah me veliki utopije, onoga što se može ostvariti. Ja hod’o tamo: park čuveni, a oni jadnici, subotom roštiljaju, sto hiljada roštilja, od ovih nekih koji piju do ovih nekih koji su, ono, malo više musli-mani. Znaš, super su ti ljudi, ali oni su, jebi ga, u prošlosti. Nema tu asimilacije. Ali imaju ‘vamo drugi Turci: igraju košarke, ono, uspješni su. A ta moja drugarica u Berlinu, fali se meni kako u ulazu nema ni jednog Nijemca. Neki Eskobar je na vrhu. To je taj vid njihove kulturalnosti. (...) Kad je ona došla u Sarajevo – naravno, super je inteligentna nije ono da površinski gleda – ja živio na Breki… a ona ode u prodavnicu, kad tamo neki Jordanac prodaje. Kaže ona meni, što ti ne uradiš jednu reportažu? Reko, s kim? Pa s ovim Arapinom. Je l’ ti misliš da je čudno što ovdje ima Arapa? Misliš da se neko divi... Sad, ona ima svoju perspektivu, pošto je ona ljevičar, ono, anti- ... antigerman.

F. Š.: Eto, to ti je zašto se ne može utopija. Ovdje uvijek ljudi vole reći da nema skinheadsa, da ne-mamo trash zato što je ovdje orijentalno... nije tipično zapadnoevropski. U Americi su najgori trasheri Bosanci, oni mrze crnce odmah... odmah... na sportskom terenu. A u biti, oni su crnci... došli su. Tako da je pitanje za utopiju. Zašto Sarajevo...

X: ... nema Kineza?

F. Š.: Kao ono, jedu šaku riže, ništa ne ostavljaju državi, kradu... Pa bio je Chinatown, počeo se graditi... mogli su napraviti nešto. To ti govori o ksenofobiji.

F. Š.: Valjda bi bilo bolje da ima drugih, a ne samo ovih naših dosadnih naroda. Zar ne bi to bio pravi mini-megalopolis?

X: Nijemci su sami rekli da je propao... multikulturalizam.

F. Š.: Taj koncept bi donekle mor’o propasti. Prvo, mi smo monokulturni... kako ćemo mi…

UTOPIJSKI GRAD U BIH STVARNOSTI

F. Š.: U Sarajevu, mi imamo drugu perspektivu – mi ne živimo u stvarnosti. Kad odem na teren, u Istočnu Bosnu, da radim reportažu, i kad se vratim u Sarajevo, odmah ljubim prvu stopu – joj, drago Sarajevo, uželio sam te se, čovječe. Jer, prvo... necivilizacijski su uslovi u kojima ljudi žive, a drugo, Sarajevo je u tome neki novi Jeruza-lem, ono u najboljem smislu, baš utopijski grad.

X: U stvarnosti Bosne, Sarajevo je zapravo utopijsko?

F. Š.: Da. Imaš, Mostar… Mostar je prekrasan grad. Što se toga tiče, ja bih sad otiš’o živit u Mo-star. Ali to je podijeljen grad... ja ne bih mog’o tu živjeti. I, onda, imaš, Banjaluku, koja je etnički čist grad, u kojem isto ne bih živio. Mislim, bolje se osjećam u Beogradu nego u Banjaluci. Mi-slim, odem ja u Banjaluku, al’ grad je potpuno pravoslaviziran i srbiziran i to je tako bezveze.

F. Š.: Tu neka raja žive, oni se nešto bore… Čo-vječe... srušili sve džamije… Nisi nikakav vjernik, ono, razumiješ... Tu je nešto bilo, jebi ga. (…) Ja sad gledam u mom gradu: pravoslavna crkva stoji, nije zapaljena zato što je nismo imali čime zapaliti... ja je sigurno ne bih zapalio. Mada vjerovatno bih... I, sad, da mi imamo ovdje tu kapsulu za samosa-stavljanje, ja bih vama pokazao to jedinstvo religija. Znači, ima katolička crkva, koju su četnici zapalili, džamija, koju su četnici zapalili, ta velika crkva je ostala, a to je sve u sto metara, možda i manje. Znači, bukvalno, ono, razglednica... utopijska.

X: Kako ih ta prošlost koči da misle o toj budućnosti?

F. Š.: Čovječe… Omarska... Omarska je čisti science fiction, Omarska kao gradić. Ja sam zaključio da je hortikulturna sređenost tih

30

dvorišta i arhitektonska izložba tih kuća u pot-punoj suprotnosti s onim što leži u tim ljudima. Meni je bilo fascinantno da taj grad živi u pot-punoj idili. A pola metra odatle je...

X: Logor.

F. Š.: Da, tu je bio logor... To su hangari... Ti kad dođeš tamo, ti nećeš prepoznati da je tu nešto bilo. Al’, kad sam prolazio kroz tu Omarsku, radi godišnjice logora – to, naravno, policija sve – iskočio neki epski čiča, epski u smislu pojave, sijed i onako jak: Polako, polako, na mojoj ste zemlji. Sad, mi, prvenstveno novinari… vidiš ljudi gledaju... podsjeća te to na to. I kako će on ići u budućnost, on je potpuno izbris’o to, znači, on nema te prošlosti, fali mu, ukin’o samog sebe. Ne govorim ja o zločincima.

F. Š.: Zato je Sarajevo... po meni, već stvarno utopija.

X: Je l’ misliš da su se ljudi ovdje dovoljno suočavali?

F. Š.: Ne mislim. Al’ opet… Na kraju krajeva sve što se radi, ovo što mi radimo, ne znam… ima nas puno... veliki grad... Ma nemoj više o ratu...

NEDEFINISANI

A. H.: Nešto malo razmišljam o onom pitanju, šta može biti budućnost Sarajeva? Mislim da se ono što se može napraviti u Sarajevu ne može napraviti u drugim glavnim gradovima u regionu. Jedno-stavno zato što smo na taj način i prokleti i s tom pozicijom i s tom mješavinom i s tim svim. To nam daje i tu ekstra mogućnost za neke stvari koje bi tu mogle da se zamisle na jedan regionalni način, a nikad se neće desiti u Zagrebu ili Beogradu. Zato što su jednostavno, te dvije strane, kako da kažem, na neki način definisane. Mi nismo definisani. Mi možemo da u jednom momentu pripadamo i tu i tamo, i ovdje i ondje. Ta potreba određenosti je problem, ali ako se na to pogleda kao potencijal, stvarno možemo da napravimo šta god hoćemo, što bi bilo relevantno za region, i geografski i zbog čitave ove priče i prošlosti.

IDENTITET, POTENCIJAL I PROBLEM

N. K.: Mi ovdje imamo, naprosto, nekakav omjer velikih religija u nekim približnim procentima, mnogo približnijim nego što je to možda u Francuskoj, nego što je u Italiji. (...) Ja mislim da je jedan od najvećih potencijala za Bosnu ujedno i naš najveći problem. A, to je identitet. Bez obzira što se ja slažem sa postavkama da je identitet imaginarni koncept koji su izmislile ili formulisale elite, opet, takve stvari su ipak ime za nešto. Ja lično doživljavam identitet Bosne i Hercegovine u jednom hibridnom stanju, i doživljavam ga kao veliku prednost. Činjenica da sam ja iz Hercegovine, sa tromeđe, sa jedne takve geografske tačke, uvijek mi daje osjećaj prednosti; osjećaj da je to bogatstvo koje sam naslijedio, a koje nisam ničim zaslužio, i sad treba da ga opravdam nečim. Nije to nikakva priča o tome kako vrabac u Sarajevu sa džamije na crkvu pređe, to je priča za razglednice. Ja osjećam da imam mogućnost da gledam sa jed-nom multi-perspektivom, zato što imam razli-čite korijene u sebi, dok nas društvo, ovdje, uči suprotnom. Govori se o čistoći identiteta, što je uvijek, predigra za mračne ideje.

X: A, zar nije ta tvoja predstava identiteta, zapra-vo, utopija? Šta bi, onda, bio utopijski identitet u Bosni?

N. K.: Utopijski identitet u Bosni je da su Boš-njaci nastali od zvjezdane prašine i da se nisu miješali ni sa kim. I tako i Srbi, i tako i Hrvati. To je nacionalistička utopija.

X: A, ova druga...

N. K.: Ova druga bi bila, kako bi rekao, kosmo-politska utopija. Kad bi ljudi počeli prihvatati: super, ja sam izmiješan! Ja mislim da je to preva-zilaženje stvar individualnih napora. E, sad, druš-tvo to može propagirati. A zašto neko ne zastupa takve političke ili kulturne ideje, to je stvar...

X: Nekog inžinjeringa.

N. K.: Inžinjeringa i začaranog kruga autoterito-rijalizacije u koju smo mi sami sebe zaključali.

31

NEDOSTAJUĆI PROSTOR RAZMJENE, IZVAN TRŽIŠTA

10. KVALITETNA ARHITEKTURA I FIZIČKO OKRUŽENJE:Pravo na prihvatljiv, podsticajan fizički oblik, postignut kroz savremenu arhitekturu visokog kvaliteta i očuvanja, kao i zadržavanje i pažljivo obnavljanje graditeljske baštine.


Da li smatrate da u Sarajevu nedostaje

trg(ova) / parkovskih površina? [77]

Da. ..............................................................90,91%

Ne. ................................................................9,09%

Nema mišljenje. .............................................. 0%

(izvor: Ankete.me)

Maršalka ili Kasarna Maršala Tita je objekt

koji je trebao postati univerzitetski kampus.

Tokom 2000. godine izrađen je master plan

budućeg kampusa. Univerzitetski kampus

trebao je omogućiti mladima Sarajeva i

Bosne i Hercegovine, studentima bolje i

kvalitetnije visoko obrazovanje. No, Bosna

i Hercegovina je ipak zemlja koja niti “voli”

mlade niti investira u njihovo obrazovanje.

[...] Krajem 2004. godine umjesto da vidi-

mo izgrađeni kampus, Vijeće Ministara BiH

donosi odluku, a 3. februara 2005. godine

Predstavnički dom Parlamentarne skupšti-

ne potvrđuje jednoglasno (svi zastupnici i

vlasti i opozicije) da se 44.175 m2 proda

Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama. Riječ je

o zemljištu i nekretninama iz okvira bivše

Kasarne Maršal Tito. SAD će platiti ukupno

12.868.503,51 KM što u prevodu znači 291

KM po kvadratnom metru na jednoj od naj-

skupljih lokacija u Sarajevu.

(Izvor: Infobar.ba)

IDITE NA TRG DA SE NEŠTO DESI

S. R.: Trgovi su mjesta razmjene: kad penzi-oneri vani igraju šah, oni se zezaju, ali i raz-mjenjuju informacije. I tad su oni zadovoljni i sretni. Sjećam se kad su na ovom trgu ispred crkve klinci puštali one neke avione... Za mene su trgovi mjesta gdje se nešto slučajno može desiti i ja bih uvijek rekao: idite na trg

32

da se nešto desi. To je za mene javni prostor. A javni prostor je javni onoliko koliko je u upotrebi, dok politika uvijek voli da sebi pravi spomenik... ili ga pretvara u upotrebni pro-stor. (…) Šta imate ovdje ispred Pozorišta? Šta imate, evo tu, ispred Umjetničke galerije? Parkirališta!

NEMA TRGA

Z. Ć.: Čega god se ovdje uhvatiš – utopija.

Z. Ć.: E, sad, tu ide nadgradnja cijele priče u kojoj mi nemamo trga. E, to je baš utopija, da se negdje oko McDonaldsa, recimo, spusti pod zemlju.

X: Podzemni trg?

Z. Ć.: Ne. Saobraćaj.

KONSTRUKTIVNE PIJACE

X: A tu neku ljepšu sliku, da li bi je mogao naći u svakodnevnici?

A. T.: Pijace. Jedino pijace. One su pune života, one su pune neke vitalnosti, pa čak i u nekom negativnom smislu, pune nekih sitnih prevara. Dakle, one imaju tu dinamičnost u sebi. Imaju komponentu pregovaranja, cjenjkanja, valja – ne valja; konstruktivne su po društvo, po druš-tveni dijalog.

KAD BI BILO

S. M.: Šta bih volio... šta ne bih volio...

S. M.: Volio bih da kafane rade do šest. Meni je još uvijek kafana nekako kao agora, ili dobar dernek, ili nešto… pa ti pričaš s ljudima, družiš se, pa komunikacija jedan na jedan. Neverbalna komunikacija je vrlo bitna, koliko i verbalna. Tu nemaš one neke kose crte, uskličnike... ja to pola ne razumijem, kad mi pošalje mail, ono, dvotač-ka i D. Šta je to?

S. M.: Onda, volio bih da muzeji rade dugo.

X: Dugo u noć?

S. M.: Da. Prosto od 10 do 2.

S. M.: Recimo, jako sam priželjkivao, kad je sru-šena robna kuća Sarajka, da tu bude Nacionalna biblioteka. Po meni to treba da bude u centru grada, da bude živo mjesto. Naravno, bio sam svjestan da će to biti tržni centar, ali, bože moj. Pa kasarna Jajce da bude centar za mlade istraži-vače, da bude pola ateljei, a pola nauka. Da ljudi nešto sarađuju, druže se, malo izdvojeni. Jok, biće vjerovatno hotel sa pet zvjezdica i kazino...

S. M.: Ja bih volio da svi ozbiljno shvate dvije dječije pjesmice koje smo svi pjevali: U svijetu postoji jedno carstvo i Uzmi veliki ekser. Ja sam smrtno ozbiljan.

X: Zašto?

S. M.: Pa, otpjevaj je, čisto da se ponašamo k’o u te dvije pjesmice, koje čak i nisu više dječije.

80 000 M2

S. A.: Ustrojstvo je pseudofeudalno. Bosmal, BBI centar (ja ne volim reći BBI nego Sarajka), Bri-stol – sve je to napravljeno isključivo zato da se opere lova. I to ne ona ratna, već ono što su iza rata nakrali...

S. A.: Oni su dobili dozvolu za 30.000 kvadrata, a napravili su 80.000. Nemamo dalje šta govori-ti. Dokle je ta feudalna bahatost došla…

S. A.: Bosmal je fulao, idiotluk je da to prebogata Malezija pravi. To je i tehnološki visoko rangira-na država – oni mogu doći ovdje autoput gradi-ti. A, doći raditi stambenjak u nekoj sarajevskoj zabiti je suludo.

ARHITEKTI, PROIZVOĐAČI PROSTORA

S. R.: Mislim da se arhitektura, odnosno urba-nizam, ne može tako jednostavno čitati, gledati, kada od vas očekuju da napravite kuće, mjesta gdje će ljudi boraviti. Sve je to u nekim layerima.

33

A kad dobijete zadatak da se bavite samo jed-nim layerom... Nisam siguran da bi to danas trebao biti cilj arhitekture.

S. R.: Kao neki običan arhitekt, ja slijedim i ci-vilizacijska kretanja. Moram ih razumjeti. Ja se bavim i prošlošću. Učim iz prošlosti. Nije Sara-jevo nikakav posebni specifikum. Samo se taj suživot ovdje desilo, jer je dosta organski nastao, pa je onda tako i odnjegovan. Međutim, danas tog Sarajeva više nema. I moj cilj je razumjeti te velike globalne promjene i to unutar nekih svojih aktivnosti. (...) Ja mislim da je arhitektura odgojna, ona je okvir za nešto unutarnje. Čo-vjek bi trebao da živi bolje, da se osjeća bolje i da bude dio jednog toka prema nečem boljem. Ja kao arhitekt proizvodim prostor, taj prostor obrazuje stanovnika, korisnika.

GRAD INTELIGENTNIH MREŽA

S. R.: Definitivno se nisam nimalo odmakao od te moje tadašnje vizije za Sarajevo 2020. Da bi građani grada Sarajeva, odnosno, ova naša zajednica, funkcionirali, potrebna su mjesta gdje će se ljudi susretati. To bi bio povezani grad, grad susretanja i druženja. Mjesto tih susreta sam nazvao agore, to nisu forumi. Agora je de-mokratski pristup, gdje svako može učestvovati, dok je forum imao neku hijerarhijski postavlje-nu strukturu, predstavnike, kao što je i u poli-tici – čim on uđe u forum on promijeni kožu i poziciju. U agorama nije bilo tako, grčka agora je bila demokratsko i otvoreno mjesto za dogo-vor, za razgovor, za razmjene misli. Kod mene su to agore budućnosti, veze, informacije, ideje i znanja. I mislim da sam, ovako, veoma znakovi-to završio: Možemo stajati nogama na zemlji, a ipak imati glavu u oblacima. To je za mene bila neka vrsta dobre utopije, koja je okrenuta pozi-tivi, koja pokreće.

S. R.: To je ideja grada povezanog inteligen-tnom mrežom, gdje je informacioni sustav grada otvoren, besplatan; i treće, imate infor-macije, znanje. Šta znači inteligentna mreža? Malo je sad možda smiješno da to govorim, ali danas imate cijelu poplavu prijenosa energije

bežičnim putem. Ja sam tada mislio da i znanje ima svoju količinu energije i ako možeš struju, što ne bi mogao, prenositi i znanje daljinskim putem. Bavio sam se jedno vrijeme intenzivno time šta znači vidjeti čeonim režnjevima, a šta stražnjim režnjevima. I tako, kad sam ovo po-stavio, probao sam praviti fizičku strukturu. Jer, to je pitanje, kako izgleda fizička struktura tog grada, u kojem između studenta ili građanina nema razlike. U međuvremenu je ta nauka o mozgu nevjerovatno otišla, a mi smo od drugih stvari postali neosjetljivi, previše civilizirani... ne znamo koristiti emotivna stanja.

34

SPROVOĐENJE DISFUNKCIONALNOSTI

11. HARMONIZACIJA FUNKCIJA:Gdje su življenje, rad, putovanje i obavljanje društvenih aktivnosti u što je moguće većoj međusobnoj povezanosti.


State Department navodi da je Bosna i Her-

cegovina i dalje zemlja u kojoj su političke

poteškoće nepremošćene, a u kojoj lako mo-

žete biti meta napada bez ikakvog upozore-

nja. Stoga, američko državno ministarstvo si-

gurnosti svoje građane upozorava upravo na

neiskorijenjeni kriminal u Bosni i Hercegovini,

s posebnim naglaskom upravo na terorizam

i vjerske ekstremiste. [...] “U Sarajevu je 28.

listopada 2011. meta terorističkog pucačkog

napada bilo upravo Veleposlanstvo Amerike

kojom prilikom je ranjen jedan lokalni polica-

jac. Dok većina žitelja BiH cijeni intervencije

međunarodne zajednice, ima i onih koji u sebi

nose animozitet prema strancima”, navodi dalje

State Department. [...] Amerikancima se savje-

tuje da u Sarajevu izbjegavaju nesuglasice koje

mogu proizaći iz prometnih nezgoda, kao i da

ne nose veće količine novca, te da se čuvaju

džeparoša, osobito u tramvajima. Podsjeća ih

se da građani BiH rijetko nose ruksake, a da

su oni koji ih nose laka meta džeparoša, koji

ih mogu opljačkati a da ih uopće ne primijete.

Amerikance se poziva da poštuju zakone Bo-

sne i Hercegovine, osobito kada su u pitanju

opijati. [...] Vremenske neprilike tijekom zimskih

mjeseci, prema ocjeni State Departmenta su

također ono na što treba pripaziti u BiH, jer se

“često otkazuju letovi iz Sarajeva zbog guste

magle, pa turisti u zadnji minut moraju mijenjati

raspored”. Bosna i Hercegovina, prema mišlje-

nju Amerikanaca, nije zemlja u kojoj se lako

mogu snaći osobe s invaliditetom, a zbog lošeg

zraka i alergena poručuje se da je izbjegavaju

osobe s dišnim smetnjama. BiH “krase” i mine

i loše ceste. [...] Dodaju i da ceste nisu kao u

SAD-u. Navode da su česti zastoji i blokade,

zbog odrona, klizišta i prometnih nesreća, a da

su ceste u lošem stanju – nesigurne, krivudave

i uske, te se često može naići na loše obilježene

radove na cesti.

(izvor: Republikainfo.com)

35

CIVILISATION

Z. Ć.: Kad su se pojavile one igrice nakon rata, ako se sjećate, gdje gradiš svoje carstvo...

X: Age of Empires, Civilisation.

Z. Ć.: Je l’ se tako zove… Pa ti moraš napraviti grad, pa moraš svom gradu dati ovo i ono da tvoji stanovnici budu zadovoljni, pa oni napada-ju sa strane, pa se ti braniš... i sve te stvari. Ne-kako od toga meni je krenula ideja – pogotovo nakon rata, kad je krenula sva ta, šatro, izgrad-nja i renoviranje – da, ustvari, niko od gradskih i kantonalnih službenika – da se ja pitam – ne bi mogao početi raditi svoj posao dok ne prođe tu igricu. Čisto da bi shvatio da grad ne čine građe-vine nego da grad treba biti u funkciji ljudi.

NEMOGUĆNOST UPRAVLJANJA

A. T.: Shvatio sam da, otkako razmišljam o Sarajevu, kao prva misao mi se nametne neki problem s kojim se suočavamo. I, taj problem je iz moje lične perspektive nerješiv. Dakle, podrazumijeva djelovanje, ne čak ni samog Sarajeva kao zajednice, nego puno šire djelo-vanje, tako da sam ustvari Sarajevo definisao kao distopiju, ostvarenu distopiju gospodara rata i poraća. Tako bi moja jedina utopija bila, vraćanje Sarajeva na neki nulti stadij, a to je taj stadij prije rata kad se on krenuo razvijati kao grad u savremenom smislu te riječi. Sad se tu postavlja pitanje – šta je grad? I zašto Sarajevo nije grad? Ono to nije u funkcionalnom smislu. Ne funkcioniše kao grad. Ovo je, dakle, jedan nedefinisan prostor u svakom smislu. I govoriti o Sarajevu kao o izolovanom fenomenu, bez obaziranja na kontekst države, gotovo je nemo-guće jer je prekinut jedan kontinuitet, a to je kontinuitet progresa.

A. T.: Sarajevo nema snagu da upravlja sobom, ono nema ni kreativnu, ni intelektualnu snagu. Sarajevo je grad bez industrije. Sarajevo je grad gdje se u ponoć isključuje voda. Sarajevo nema vode. Sarajevo je nemoćan grad. Sarajevo je, ra-tom i poraćem, grad koji se, ustvari, konstantno održava infuzijama.

A. T.: Sarajevo ne upravlja samo sobom jer su nadležnosti grada podijeljene na glavni grad države, glavni grad Federacije, administrativni centar Kantona... Potom, ne ostvaruje svoje pra-vo na lokalnu samoupravu, koje je garantovano evropskom konvencijom. Ne može ga ostvari-vati jer dio nadležnosti za upravljanje (recimo, obrazovnim institucijama) nosi Kanton a dio je, opet, na općinama, pa se tu ne znaju granice. Ne zna se, recimo, gdje je granica između Općine Centar i Općine Stari Grad, pa je neka fiktivna granica tu na Ferhadiji… I tu je, recimo – ako jedna općina zabrani prodaju kuhanog vina na svojoj teritoriji – dovoljno da se samo pređe ta fiktivna granica i ulazi se u drugu općinu. Dakle, u tim banalnim segmentima života ne može se postići neka ujednačenost. Ili, opet, granica iz-među Općine Centar i Općine Novo Sarajevo je negdje na Vilsonovom šetalištu. Dakle, ne može se reći da Vilsonovim šetalištem, kao jedinstve-nom cjelinom, upravlja grad, iako koristi svim građanima. Da ne govorimo da je Sarajevo grad na potencijalnoj budućoj granici ukoliko se dr-žava bude raspadala, što nije nerealna situacija. Dakle, stoga se Sarajevo stalno reartikuliše, i drži se na tom stand-byu za neki mogući novi rat. (...) Ne kažem da bi nešto bilo bolje kad bi grad sam sobom upravljao, ali onda bismo ba-rem znali kome isporučiti probleme koji se tiču grada i ko je uopšte za šta nadležan ovdje.

RASKRINKAVANJE ILI USKLAĐIVANJE MITOVA

X: Duh. A šta je s duhom?

A. T.: To je mit. Priča o tom sarajevskom duhu oslanja se na njegovu predratnu prošlost, kada je to jednostavno bio zbir dobrih stvari, kad je život bio bolji. Desila se, recimo, Olimpijada, najvećim dijelom u organizaciji samog Sarajeva. I, ta Olimpijada je bez marketinga vratila 80 % uloženih sredstava, s marketingom i svim osta-lim stvarima je to prešišala. Desila se izložba savremene umjetnosti, Jugoslovenska dokumen-ta. Sarajevska muzika je bila slušana i mimo granica Jugoslavije. Dakle, dešavale su se neke izuzetne stvari koje su stvarale ambijent u kome se svako osjeća komotnim; jednostavno, nije

36

se osjećala nikakva propast. Do te mjere je taj grad bio pod nekom euforijom progresa da se i stvorilo nešto što su ljudi jednostavno proglasili tim duhom. Pa, sad, kada iz ove perspektive vide nešto što asocira na to, kažu: to je sarajevski duh, to miriše na sarajevski duh.

(...)

A. T.: Da bi Sarajevo bilo grad, ono mora raskr-stiti sa tim svojim mitovima, mora ih na neki način drugačije artikulirati. Eto, naprimjer, sa tom Olimpijadom: ona stoji kao svojevrsna iko-na nad Sarajevom, ona u simboličkom nomina-riju Sarajeva zauzima neko mjesto koje je jako visoko. A, recimo, imate Olimpijski muzej – koji je ruševina. Ili, na godišnjicu Olimpijade, olim-pijski objekti urušavaju se pod težinom snijega: krov na Skenderiji, prije toga na Zetri. Dalje, Sarajevo aplicira za evropsku prijestolnicu kul-ture 2014., a u njemu se kulturne institucije ili gase ili se najavljuje njihovo gašenje. Imate, reci-mo, i to da je u ratu projekat Ars Aevi, za Muzej savremene umjetnosti, stavljen na listu državnih prioriteta tadašnje vlade, kada su neki svjetski značajni umjetnici poklanjali svoja djela u znak protesta protiv opsade Sarajeva... Ali on još ne postoji. (...) Zatim, opet, priča o tom Sarajevu kao o nekom svojevrsnom evropskom Jerusale-mu, kao centru multikulturalizma… I tu je mali problem. Iako se pojam multikulturalizam olako

upotrebljava i nerijetko mu se daje pogrešno značenje, u Sarajevu, u javnom diskursu, ne postoji rasprava o interkulturalizmu, izuzev što ponekad neko o tome napiše svojevrstan esej...

A. T.: (...) Multikulturalizam već podrazumijeva presjecišta, podrazumijeva interakciju kultura. Sarajevo bi se odredilo kao grad kad bi pristalo na priču o interkulturalizmu, jer to podrazumi-jeva građansko društvo, podrazumijeva priču o ljudskim pravima, sve ono što tumačimo da je zapadna civilizacija prva progurala kao glavno. A unutar toga, naravno, postoje te kulture koje su samostalne, slobodne da se prezentuju, da budu u interakciji – ali nikad one ne kroje sud-bina grada, već je ona iskrojena raznim statu-tima, konvencijama koje bi se morale poštivati, prije nego kulturni običaji i norme.

Y: Kako bi se to... sa mitovima uopšte razriješilo?

A. T.: Pa, ili stvarnost na neki način uskladiti sa tim mitovima, pa im biti dosljedan ili ih jedno-stavno otpisati. Ne na način da se oni zaborave, jer se jednostavno ne može zaboraviti, ali da se jednostavno ne potenciraju, već da postanemo svjesni toga što smo i da je to sada prošlost. Ina-če se javljaju paradoksi.

ODGAĐANJE BUDUĆNOSTI

A. T.: Mi ne znamo šta se može desiti, ustvari. Zaista, možemo izabrati na nekim izborima neke principijelne političare, koji će prirodne i energentske resurse staviti pod kontrolu države, pa preko njihovog eksploatisanja puniti razvoj-nu banku, a iz razvojne banke, po jako niskim kamatnim stopama, davati stambene kredite, recimo, mladim ljudima, koji će, na taj način, s kreditom po kamati od 3 %, kupiti sebi stan i biti sretni i zadovoljni u tom stanu. To se može desiti. To su faktički tri poteza, dakle, stavimo pod kontrolu prirodne i energentske resurse, ulažemo sredstva od eksploatacije u razvojnu banku, razvojna banka pravi razvojne projekte, građani od tih projekata ..

X: To je jedan nivo...

37

A. T.: To je iluzorno, ali, eto, može se jedna stvar tako riješiti, a najvjerovatnije neće. S druge stra-ne, može se iznenada desiti da se nevladin sek-tor prestane 100 % prilagođavati očekivanjima neoliberalnog kapitala i počne misliti na socijal-nu i ekonomsku komponentu društva.

X: Da li NGO sektor ima toliki potencijal?

A. T.: Kad pogledamo po brojnost organizaci-ja, koje se bave svim i svačim, reklo bi se... Ali, kad pogledamo nereagovanja na niz stvari, i da imamo tek nekoliko njih koje su u svojoj misiji i viziji istrajne do kraja... S treće strane, mogu se desiti globalne promjene koje će utjecati da se i ovdje nešto promijeni nabolje... ako se odnekle već kotrlja, pa da i mi tu grudvu uoblikujemo. Ali, bez velikih čuda. Mislim, da se razumijemo: utopija jeste nešto što se stalno odgađa, ona je mamac koji nas privlači da idemo naprijed. Mi nju nećemo svakako nikad ostvariti, ali je pitanje koliko joj se možemo približiti. S kapa-citetima koje mi imamo, bez obzira na sva naša umrežavanja, na svu našu energiju koju bismo uložili na ispravljanje tih krivih drina i svega toga. To nije ni puni korak koliko se svaki od nas može približiti toj svojoj utopiji, a da ona bude tu realizirana u Sarajevu. Dakle, bliže je onom da nam služe da skroz ne potonemo nego što ćemo se nešto značajno njima približiti. Ta-kva je moja vizija pesimistična, dakle.

38

NESTVORENO ZAJEDNIŠTVO

12. UČEŠĆE:Pravo na učešće u pluralističkim demokratskim strukturama i u upravljanju gradom, koje odlikuje saradnja različitih partnera, princip supsidijarnosti, informisanosti i slobode od prekomjernih propisa.


Iako u Bosni i Hercegovini trenutno posto-

ji značajan broj inicijativa koje se odnose na

različite aspekte obrazovanja javnosti o prav-

nom sistemu (OJSP), komparativna analiza, ali

i predstavnici organizacija sa kojima su urađeni

intervjui, ukazuju na to da trenutna nastojanja

u tom pravcu nisu dovoljna i da nisu u skladu

sa najboljom praksom. Ta konstatacija posebno

dolazi do izražaja kada se u razmatranje uzmu

procjene potreba za provođenjem ovakvih obra-

zovnih programa. Kompleksan pravni sistem,

postkonfliktni kontekst i mnoštvo novih pravnih

instituta i propisa, u kombinaciji sa komplicira-

nom mrežom pravosudnih institucija i nadležno-

sti, stvaraju pravni labirint u kome se ponekad

teško snalaze i oni koji prolaze kroz formalnu

pravnu edukaciju. Ne treba izostaviti ni faktore

poput visoke stope siromaštva, zbog koje su u

zemljama koje danas imaju bolje organizirane

sisteme OJPS-a prvobitno i pokrenuti ovakvi

programi, ili, pak, značajan problem maloljetnič-

ke delinkvencije, gdje programi OJPS-a, prema

dostupnim istraživanjima, mogu imati preventiv-

nu ulogu. Ukupnu situaciju dodatno usložnjava

nemogućnost elektronskog pristupa službenim

glasilima, osim uz novčanu naknadu, koja je ne-

ophodna i za njihova štampana izdanja.

(Izvor: Obrazovanje javnosti o pravnom sistemu u

Bosni i Hercegovini, Dženana Hrlović, str 60.)

NIJE ON, JA SAM

S. M.: Ako pričaš na nekom ličnom planu, meni je najveća utopija na Balkanu priča o preuzimanju odgovornosti – i pritom ne mislim na preuzimanje odgovornosti u smi-slu suđenja za ratne zločine, pa da svi drugi kažu Priznao je on pa da priznam i ja – nego počevši od banalnog: kad ti stanem na nogu, da se izvinim; kad napravim nešto ružno da kažem Izvini, nisam stvarno imao tu namjeru. A, nekako, kad kod nas pričaš o odgovornosti, uvijek je priča nisam ja – on je, pa bilo to i bacanje smeća u haustoru, nepomaganje ne-kome kome to treba. Dakle, na vrlo malom planu, osnovnom ljudskom planu. Meni bi to bila utopija... taj neki idealni oblik življenja, kad komunikacija bude dovoljno jasna, kad bude zaista asertivna i kad zaista možemo biti otvoreni u dijalogu jedno prema drugom, bez zadržavanja zadnje primisli za sebe. Ono, što na umu – to na drumu.

MI?

A. H.: Da li je to u ljudima na ovom prostoru.. ali stvarno, ono što ne postoji to je timski rad. Znači, da se osjeti da neko, banalno rečeno, radi kao grupa, da neko razmišlja kao grupa. Znači, ne ja, ne on, ne ti nego...

39

Y: ... mi.

A. H.: Mi. I to je, po meni, najveći problem. Ovdje u stvari, svaka individua misli za sebe. Bukvalno. Od onog psa lutalice do gradona-čelnika. Naravno da je elementarna nepogoda učinila da svako prvo mora da misli na sebe, pa onda možda ima energije da misli i šire. Po meni je to problem sa društvom generalno, sa zapadnoevropskim društvom. Negdje se izgubio taj koncept da, ustvari, rješenje leži u grupi a ne individui. Po meni je tu neka utopija – vjerova-nje da se kao grupa nešto može uraditi.

S. K.: Šta bi, onda, bila izvodljivost grada prema mentalitetu građana? Dakle, ako ste rekli da je globalni trend udruživanja, da li Sarajevo može to da izdrži, to je pitanje. Dakle, opet dolazimo na to da nije sve u parama.

S. K.: Kad god mi neko pokuša objasniti Jao što mi je bilo divno u Sarajevu – pa, reci mi gdje ti je bilo divno… Jeste to, vazda je nešto bilo super. Ta neka atmosfera, to neko ozračje u Sarajevu, sarajevski duh očevidno postoji. Sad kad se on našarafi na jedan veliki podvig pa drugi veliki podvig, to je i dokaz da se može i komunikacija i reinventiranje. Ali moraš svakoga pojedinačno preokrenuti da kaže: udruži se, udruži se. I onda se može razgovarati... Da bude emocija, ljubav, komunikacija, razmjena pameti, znanja. (...) Što bi rekao Rambo Amadeus: Postanite ponovo šarmantni.

KONTROLA LIČNOG, FRUSTRACIJA JAVNIM

S. Ć.: Kad nešto slušam o tome, o bilo kakvim inicijativama, organske proizvodnje hrane, uređenja, aroma-terapije, kineziologije – imam neke prijatelje koji su u tim sferama – pomislim: organska proizvodnja – da je meni raščistiti haustor! (...) Mislim da čak i fotografija kao hobi ima te neke veze sa kontrolisanom stvarnošću: ja ću sada mojim aparatom da uslikam nešto savršeno, jer toliko mogu kontrolisati taj i taj prostor. Mislim da to ima veze sa tom frustra-cijom sa javnim. To je možda neka podsvijest, zato što je prije sve bilo javno i na njega se više

obraćalo pažnje nego na privatno. A, s druge strane, ista je tolika frustracija kad uđete u hau-stor i vidite taj užas. Imate potrebu da dođete gore u stan i onda opsesivno glancate vaše čaše za vino i okružite se ljudima koji ne izgledaju kao da su dio te realnosti i obučete najljepše moguće stvari.

S. Ć.: Sistem je u jednoj simbiozi sa našim jav-nim prostorom. Tom sistemu, zapravo, odgovara taj nedostatak nade, koji projektuju i mediji, i onda pristajete na kompromise, političke i sve druge. I to neko kalkulisanje, totalni nedostatak ideala... I taj politički sistem koji nam na neki način poručuje: narode, ne maštaj o mogućem. Uopšte se ne razmišlja o mogućnosti da se taj sistem potpuno promijeni. Trebamo radikalno glasati za ljude koji možda nemaju nikakvih šansi ali – barem do tridesete – u skladu sa vla-stitim uvjerenjima…

S. Ć.: Ja jesam, neosnovano sam optimista. Mada mislim da se stvara neki prostor na osnovu prezasićenosti. Neće ovdje, naravno, nikada doći do revolucije; previše smo lijeni, previše volimo kafu da bismo protestovali na hladnoći. Ali ta neka kolektivna zasiće-nost bi mogla rezultirati nečim. Ne, naravno, utopijom o kojoj pričamo – u kojoj bi mi svi imali neke prostore u kojima bi se robno-nov-čano-u-naturi bavili trgovinom – ali, mislim

40

da ima prostora, prvenstveno za kreativni rad i za neko potpuno alternativno političko djelovanje za koje možda nema prostora u uređenim sistemima. Imam osjećaj da bi se u narednih pet godina mogle desiti neke tek-tonske promjene.

X: Daj bože. To se sve svodi na daj bože.

S. Ć.: Nije to zdrav stav.

S. Ć.: A kako ići ka tome? Hm. Kad kažem in-dividualna akcija, jednostavno, toliko je mala konkurencija za bilo šta u Sarajevu, za bilo šta. Jedine privatne konkurencije su, možda, kla-dionice i te neke djelatnosti. Ali, ako govorim o krugu ljudi s kojima mi provodimo vrijeme, nevjerovatno je kako smo siromašni u aspiraci-jama i ambicijama.

OTVORENA PRAVILA IGRE

A. H.: Uspjeh bi bio da se, na neki način, balan-sira u traženju mjere u odnosima, da ne bude ni prestabilno, već da svjesno prihvatiš kaos, da ga, ustvari, dizajniraš, da ga ugradiš u društvo na onim mjestima gdje misliš da je potreban, ili možda nije štetan. To svjesno ugrađivanje kaosa u princip društva, to je izazov. Jer, Evropljanima je više...

X: Ukroćivanje haosa?

A. H.: Ne, hoću samo da izvučem poentu. Mi živimo u kaosu koji nam je nametnut kroz poli-tiku. A ovdje treba minimum nekakve stabilno-sti. Ja mislim da je to, ustvari, ekonomska sta-bilnost. I da mi svi budemo složni oko nečega. To, mislim, ovi svjesno izbjegavaju da naprave. Jer, mislim da se može napraviti to da bi mini-mum kaosa mogao da se ugradi u tu stabilnu konstrukciju.

Y: Neko mora da odredi pravila igre.

A. H.: Neko mora da odredi pravila igre, ali ta igra mora da bude pristupačna svima. Znači ne samo onim profesionalnim, veli-kim, ekonomski jakim – nego i pojedincima. Ako pričamo o gradnji grada, recimo, u Oslu, jedno ogromno područje – ‘ajd da kažemo kao Marindvor – prodaje se jednoj ekipi, jed-nom konzorciju firmi. Zamisli da ti se tu desi greška, to je onda mrtvo. A zašto tu ne bi bilo moguće učešće i neke grupe ljudi? Al’ onda im se moraju dati uslovi. Znači, OK je ovo, kupite ovaj plac ali ga morate realizirati u toku deset godina. To je to uvođenje nekog neformalnog u formalni grad i obrnuto, s tim što bi pravila igre morala da se odrede. (...) Ovdje se malo potencira problem padina. Po meni su, što se tiče arhitekture, u Sarajevu najmanji problem te padine i šta se na njima dešava. Gore je ovo što kolege arhitekte rade.

DRUŠTVENI RAD

N. N. Č.: Ja koristim koncept emancipatorskog političkog potencijala, u smislu djelatnog učešća u zajednici.

X: Zašto to spada u političku kategoriju?

N. N. Č.: Još od Aristotela, političko bi bilo uče-stvovanje u javnom. Dakle, djelovanje u svrhu zajednice a ne političko u smislu aktivnog bav-ljenja politikom. E, sad, kod njega je ta stroga distinkcija između javnog, između toga što je dobročinstvo, što je reprodukcija porodice,

41

prehrana... Unutar feminističke misli, o toj čitavoj podjeli na javno i privatno puno se dis-kutovalo: koliko to treba tako razdvajati... Tako da postoji puno rekonceptualizacijā toga… (…) Tako da političko nije biti aktivan u poli-tici već je političko u smislu djelatno ili što bi se u socijalizmu u kome smo mi živjeli zvalo, društveni rad, društveni angažman, rad za za-jednicu. Jednostavno, političko...

N. N. Č.: Mene zanima šta se unutar zajednice radi, zanima me kako ona izgleda... zanima me za šta se društvo brine; u tom smislu, zanima me kakve politike postoje vezano za određene stvari. I sad, činjenice jesu da svako od nas osjeti te društvene politike, čak i onaj ko apsolutno nema tu vrstu nekakvog zanimanja za javno, za zajednički prostor. Međutim, postoji, ja bih rekla, veliki broj ljudi, koji osim onih problema koji njih dotiču, zaista nemaju neki pretjeran interes za javno...

X: A, kako onda oni zamišljaju svoj život?

N. N. Č.: Vjerovatno zamišljaju da bi država tre-bala biti ta koja će jednostavno to sve da sredi. I to je, mislim, ta jedna mistifikacija politike, to je kao i pozicija žrtve, koja je u nekim slučajevima .. vrlo udobna.

KAO BLJESAK U VREMENU

N. J.: Prostor utopije, te emancipacije, pa to može biti... Eto, kad je bio ovaj prvi val snijega koji nas je zatrpao, prvi vikend: izađete na ulicu s lopatom i shvatite da je još 15 ljudi izašlo na ulicu s lopatom i ta subota je bila jedan od ne-vjerovatnih dana u mom životu. Ima jedna sjaj-na scena koja to prikazuje... u Svjedoku Pitera Viera, kada Amiši grade zajedničku šupu...

X: Ambar?

N. J.: Ambar, da. I dolaze svi, skupilo se cijelo selo... Mislim čak da je Frederick Jameson neg-dje to spomenuo kao tipski primjer utopijske zajednice, tog emancipatorskog potencijala koji se još može vidjeti na ekranu, pa još i u

holivudskoj, tada A produkciji. Ali, Amiši, to je takoreći organski tip zajednice. Dok ovdje go-vorimo o ljudima koji su zapravo izašli da očiste svako svoj auto. Niko baš nije izašao da čisti ci-jelu ulicu, međutim, kako smo izašli dolje, vani, pogledali jedni druge, naravno da je očišćena cijela ulica. Pa malo ćemo pomoći ovdje, malo ćemo pomoći ondje, pa zašto ne bismo i ovdje, kad smo već to, hajde daj, i stvar je riješena.

N. J.: Hajmo reći da riječ utopija zavarava, mož-da zapravo nije riječ o lokaciji, možda je riječ o vremenu, možda je riječ upravo o bljesku, o trenutku koji treba znati prepoznati i treba znati iskoristiti. Tako da utopija možda jeste više trenutak za kritiku, kritiku u samoj svojoj temporalnosti nego u spacijalnosti, zapravo, u prostoru, u koordinatama...

42

RAZVOJ LIČNE EKONOMIJE

13. EKONOMSKI RAZVOJ:Gdje lokalne vlasti, na odlučan i prosvijećen način, preuzimaju odgovornost za direktno ili indirektno stvaranje privrednog razvoja.


Zamislite zemlju u kojoj je nezaposlenost 95

posto, a inflacija prelazi 8 posto. Tako se živi u

Zimbabveu, zemlji koja drži neslavno čelo lje-

stvice na kojoj niko ne želi da se nađe. Indeks

jada za 197 država i teritorija izračunao je Busi-

ness Insider, sabiranjem stope nezaposlenosti

i stope inflacije indeksa potrošačkih cijena.

Lista ima ukupno 25 mjesta, a na 20. mjestu

neslavne liste nalazi se Bosna i Hercegovina,

piše Danas.hr. [...] Bosna i Hercegovina je za-

uzela 20. mjesto sa indeksom 45,5%.


KASNIM, ALI SAM ISPRED TEBE

S. Ć.: Naravno, mi smo totalni početnici kad je taj kapitalizam u pitanju, sto godina smo iza svega. Nisam se dugo vidjela sa mojim prijate-ljima u Americi, i odlazim kod njih u New York u goste, i oni, svi odjednom sade bašte na kro-vovima, uzgajaju pčele. New York je, naravno,

sproveo zakon da je sad legalno baviti se pče-larstvom na krovovima… i dio tih nekih kibuca gdje sade neke bašte i prodaju, razmjenjuju to povrće i šta sve ne. I onda razmišljam kako mi tek ulazimo u onu fazu u kojoj su oni bili prije nekih trideset godina a, zapravo moja neka opti-mistička pretpostavka je da bi se moglo presko-čiti tih nekih par koraka i da odmah skočimo na tu organsku proizvodnju, a da preskočimo ovaj dio plastičnih kineskih igračaka. Tako da mislim da je ta neka apatija dobrim dijelom proizvod generalnog razočarenja u post-rat i, onda, šta nam preostaje jest to zatupljivanje TV-om i bez-broj bellisima u ovom gradu.

X: Dobro, to nije samo ovdje. To je taj trend… bježanja u šoping…

S. Ć.: Ali, kažem, u nekim drugim zemljama se pravi puni krug, a kod nas je tek full speed ahead…

43

PROSJAČKI MENTALITET

A. T.: Sarajevo ima perspektivu žrtve, što ga koči u bilo kakvom razvoju, jer ta perspektiva žrtve uvijek se oslanja na pomoć bez vlasti-tog djelovanja. Gašenje kulturnih institucija, ustvari, prijetnju gašenju kulturnih institucija i same kulturne institucije zloupotrebljavaju, da bi se predstavile jadnijima nego što jesu. Predstavljati se jadnijim nego što jesi, ustvari, temeljni je prosjački nauk. I, ovdje se stvara je-dan prosjački mentalitet. Dakle, mi stalno ne-što ištemo, od tog gašenja kulturnih institucija, preko kukanja vjerskih zajednica – pa sami centri moći ovdje najviše kukaju! Dakle, samo se ište bez adekvatnog programa rješenja, bez strategije kulturnog razvoja, bez strategije sportskog razvoja.

INDEKS ZADOVOLJSTVA GRAĐANA

A. T.: A, kad bi neko gledao po broju automo-bila, rekao bi, u Sarajevu je dobar standard… A ustvari, automobil se percipira kao statusni sim-bol i, uopšte, mi stepen naprednosti ove sredine mjerimo kroz neki bruto društveni proizvod, kroz broj automobila, kroz broj beskućnika, kroz broj korisnika javne kuhinje i slično – a zapravo se niko nije usudio da izmjeri standard života prema indeksu zadovoljstva samih građa-na. Ljudi svoje nezadovoljstvo mjere kroz pore-đenja, a puno boljeg imaju i u vlastitoj prošlosti i u sredinama koje baš nisu tako daleko od nas, a bile su u pogledu nekog standarda života zaos-talije od nas, kao što je gotovo cijeli istočni blok koji je sada dobrim dijelom integrisan u Evrop-sku uniju. Od nekadašnje Čehoslovačke, preko Poljske, Rumunije...

ZAUZIMANJE JAVNOG PROSTORA

S. Ć.: Ja sam, nekako, očekivala puno više od tranzicije, zapravo, od ljudi u tranziciji. Zato mi je žao što nismo ovaj period, uslovno reče-no: bezvlašća, na puno bolji način iskoristili. Upravo za okupiranje javnog prostora. Polu-ilegalno zauzimanje javnog prostora jedino je moguće u ovom tranzicijskom periodu kada, zapravo, nema šansi da bude zakonski

kažnjivo, pošto su zauzeti puno gorim stvari-ma. Tako da sam nekako očekivala da će ljudi više zauzeti taj javni prostor, na bilo koji način. Toga ste se naslušali, u ovim razgovorima, o adrenalinu i tom zaposjedanju javnog prostora u ratu, gdje je neka radnja ispražnjena i tu je neko uselio i to organizovao. Sada samo u mo-joj ulici ima sigurno deset napuštenih poslov-nih prostora čiji pravni status vjerovatno nije riješen i ja se pitam što ih jednostavno neko ne zauzme dok se taj pravni status ne rješava. Gle-dam gospođe kod kojih kupujem domaće pro-izvode koje se smrzavaju u nekim prolazima. Šta bi oni mogli uraditi? Samo okreče taj jedan prostor, bez prozora, i da one tu to prodaju. Ustvari, mislim da je moć u brojevima. I, da ne trebamo gajiti iluziju da ćemo postati Danska ili uređena Njemačka.

S. Ć.: Ne krivim zaista gradske vlasti, već krivim nas. I tu neka hrabrost koja nedostaje. U ratu smo sadili bašte, zašto ih sad ne sadimo? Tada su ljudi samo obilježavali svoj prostor nekom ogradicom i tu su nešto sadili. (...) Oduševila sam se neki dan kad sam vidjela da je neko, ni-čim izazvan, zasadio luk usred Novog Sarajeva. Dobro, super, napokon je neko uzeo zakon u svoje ruke i rekao: nemam plac, ja ću sad ovdje zasaditi luk i brat ću taj luk i jesti… Tako da bi za mene javni prostor, barem u tranziciji, trebao biti puno, puno uzbudljiviji. Ako odeš u neke poluregulisane gradove – bila sam u Damasku – oduševila me ta neka poluilegalna, non-stop trgovina i maštovitost ljudi da od svega naprave taj svoj vlastiti kutak, prostor gdje će nešto pro-davati. Svi ti nerazvijeni gradovi, kojima i mi, nažalost, pripadamo, djeluju mi puno uzbud-ljivije. Pa i Priština ima neku energiju koju mi, nažalost, nemamo.

S. Ć.: Mislim, to uzmi zakon u svoje ruke samo su kriminalci u Sarajevu shvatili, a ne teta koja prodaje neki super paradajz.

44

ZONE SAMONIKLOG14. ODRŽIVI RAZVOJ:Gdje lokalne vlasti pokušavaju da postignu pomirenje privrednog razvoja i zaštite životne sredine.


Zahtjeve za legalizaciju bespravno izgrađenih

objekata u Kantonu Sarajevo građani mogu

predavati još samo tri sedmice, kada istječe rok

koji je dalo Ministarstvo prostornog uređenja i

zaštite okoliša KS. “U posljednjoj sedmici de-

cembra 2012. godine pristiglo je najviše zahtje-

va. Prema procjenama Zavoda za izgradnju, na

području Kantona trenutno ima više od 50.000

objekata koji čekaju legalizaciju. Najviše ih je

na Ilidži i Novom Gradu, gdje cvjeta divlja grad-

nja”, rekao je za Dnevni avaz Zlatko Petrović,

ministar prostornog uređenja i zaštite okoliša.

Kako je Petrović istakao, legalizacije neće biti

moguće za objekte koji su napravljeni na ak-

tivnim klizištima, u vodozaštitnim područjima i

na putnim komunikacijama. Ministar je dodao

da će se, zbog nedovoljnog broja uposlenika

u općinskim službama, zahtjevi pregledavati i

rješavati postepeno. “Objekti koji ne budu is-

punjavali uvjete morat će biti uklonjeni”, kazao

je za Avaz Petrović i dodao da je bespravna

gradnja jedan od najvećih uzročnika pojave

klizišta u Kantonu.


PREKLAPANJE SELA I GRADA

A. T.: Građani su uslovljeni selom koliko su i seljani gradom. Kako je to otprilike nekako funkcionisalo u socijalizmu, funkcioniše i sad. S tim što su i selo i grad daleko siromašniji nego prije. Sam seljak ne može dovoljno dobro živjeti od onoga što proizvede, pa usput ima i posao u gradu. A sam građanin, ako nema njivu, kupuje te proizvode sa sela na pijaci. Ovdje su selo i grad naviknuti do te mjere jedno na drugo da su gotovo srasli. (…) Negdje bi bilo nezamislivo da u holu jedne firme – koja se, recimo, bavi revi-zijom poslovanja – vidite čovjeka kako sjedi sa kutijom paradajza, krompira, jer je vani hladno pa je pitao da ga tu puste, da je viđen kroz nji-hov izlog, i da mu se tu ljudi obraćaju za uslugu. Ovdje to nikom, manje-više, nije neobično.

SIVA ZONA RURBANOG

N. J.: Utopija ne mora nužno biti grad. Jedan od motiva po kojem je bosanskohercegovački film prepoznat kao bosanskohercegovački film osamdesetih godina, i ne samo film nego kao

45

bosanskohercegovačka kultura i dan-danas, šta je to bosanstvo, to je ono tako ti je, mala moja, kad ljubi Bosanac. Tu je u igri neka vrsta uto-pije, bosanskog identiteta i te nekakve muške potencije. Sad se nama čini da je to uvijek bilo, a istražujući bosanskohercegovačke filmove, vi zapravo vidite da je to relativno novo, potpuno stvoreno. Može se odrediti i godina kada je izmišljena ova bosanska ruralna pastorala, kao svojevrsna utopija. To je sedamdeset četvrta i sedamdeset peta godina. Čak se može odrediti lokacija na kojoj je ona rođena, a to su Borike.

X: Jel?

N. J.: Sedamdeset četvrte na sedamdeset petu godinu, na Borikama se dešavaju dvije stvari: Ivica Matić snima Ženu s krajolikom; i – ko gore još odlazi i ko gore još snima? – odlazi Bijelo dugme. Oni snimaju svoj album Šta bi dao da si na mom mjestu. Album na čijem se omotu nalazi ta, jedna od najikoničnijih fotki, gdje žen-sku stražnjicu grli muška seljačka ruka u onoj bundi, gunju, neko je čupavo krzno. I, to je to. To je Tako ti je, mala moja, kad ljubi Bosanac. I to je doslovno Žena s krajolikom. Stvar je za-pravo bila potpuni medijski hipe, promotivna kampanja. Ako se ne varam, Vrdoljak je Bijelo dugme već nakon prvog albuma označio kao pastirski rok. A, onda su oni doslovno to prihva-tili: aha, hoćete pastirski rok pa idemo praviti pastirski rok i odosmo mi gore među te ovce i pastire i tup i tup, u bosansku pastoralu. Ako se bosanskohercegovački film gleda istorijski, prije Žene s krajolikom, bosanska pastorala ne postoji koncipirana na taj način. A, kako je taj krajolik koncipiran prije toga? Kao mjesto revolucije, kao mjesto borbe u Drugom svjetskom ratu, kao mjesto gdje smo se mi nekad borili u svim tim ofanzivama, osvajali taj prostor. Sjetite se, uvijek kako su počinjali partizanski filmovi. U nekoj nacističkoj vučjoj jazbini, skupe se oficiri i raza-pnu mape i kažu: mi ćemo ovamo. A, onda dođu partizani i kažu, džaba vama sve vaše mape, mi smo ti koji, zapravo, znamo kako izgleda taj teren, mi smo njegovi gospodari.

N. J.: U tom kontekstu, taj krajolik je

funkcionirao kao nešto potpuno drugo. To je bila revolucionarna arena. Pojavom bosansko-hercegovačke pastorale, isti taj krajolik biva pot-puno drugačije ideološki protumačen. Umjesto revolucije, umjesto napretka, progresa te nezau-stavljive dinamike, to postaje najmrtvije mjesto na svijetu. Tu kadrovi doslovno zamrzavaju tu pastoralu, tu se ništa ne treba mijenjati.

N. J.: (…) Taj povratak korijenima se javlja, zapravo, kao jedna kritika modernizma, jugoslo-venske modernosti, socijalističke modernosti. A šta se krije iza tog obrata... viška zelenila, viška prirode, koji se manifestira u hipermuškosti, pretjeranoj muževnosti? Zapravo, kad gledate te filmove vidite da su tu žene doslovno agenti novoga, modernosti, one dolaze u toj modernoj odjeći i naravno frustriraju te muškarce koje bi tako da ih zagrle, ali to baš i ne ide. U tom smi-slu možemo zapravo vidjeti da utopija ne mora nužno biti vezana za grad i čak bi sad zapravo, u jugoslovenskom kontekstu prijelaza sa soci-jalizma na postsocijalizam, vrijedilo ispitati taj odnos grada, sela ili te neke… sive zone između te dvije lokacije.

(...)

N. J.: Mislim, po meni se taj odnos manifestuje na najružniji način. To je to uspostavljanje razli-ke grad i selo kroz određenu formu isključivanja,

46

segregacije spram ljudi koji nisu građani, koji su došli pa nikako da nauče… kao – samo da oni nisu došli, pa gdje bi nama danas bio kraj. Ta pretpostavka da su zapravo seljaci profitirali na ratu zato što su došli u grad… Kao, bilo je tako i nakon Drugog svjetskog rata pa je i sada, a mi bismo se razvili kao grad, sve bi to nekako išlo svojim prirodnim tokom, samo da nam ne dođu svakih četrdeset godina ti seljaci, pa naprave takvu štetu da se ona ne može ispraviti narednih četrdeset godina, a onda, eto i novog rata. Što je po meni zapravo potpuno bizarno.

N. J.: Zato ja nešto nisam ubijeđen da su za ne-kakve potpuno bizarne arhitektonske egzibicije koje imamo po gradu, zapravo odgovorni selja-ci, kao ljudi koji su do jučer živjeli u nekakvim štalama i daleko od, ne znam, puteva, asfalta, ovoga, onoga, bez vodenog čvora… (...) Čini mi se da mi svi jesmo sa sela, u smislu ne dijeli nas onih famoznih six degres of separation do najbližeg seljaka. Pa, odavde – sjedimo u centru Sarajeva – vidimo selo. Pogledamo li na istok, na sjever, gdjegod, vidjet ćemo selo. Zato kažem da mi zapravo, cijelo vrijeme hendlamo sa tom nekom sivom zonom.

PRIRUČNIK ZA URBANIZAM

S. R.: Ustvari, mahala je, ne znam, 60 kuća… To je mjera. Susjedstvo. U toj ulici, na početku mahale, postoji česma, postoji džamija, postoji harem, groblje uz džamiju i postoji neka zelena-ra, neka trgovina i pekara. To je na ulazu, prema gradu, uvijek na raskršćima ima džamija i onda se ide u mahalu. To je pitanje grada, to je smisao mahale, da, ustvari, svi žive pod jednim krovom. Jer, krov je znak susjedstva, znak zajedništva. Ali danas... danas, je utopija da ljudi na ulici prepo-znaju svoje prijatelje.

(...)

S. R.: Katastrofa je da grad pojede prirodu i oko-linu. (...) Jako brzo smo došli iz tog ruralnog na-čina u taj neki pred-urbani način života. Nismo, ustvari, nekako kontinuirano, polako ulazili. (...) Pa, imamo divlji urbanizam. Nema tu plana.

Bespravna gradnja je omča oko vrata Sarajeva, a za njeno sprječavanje treba postojati i stručna i politička volja. Pitam se, ustvari, čemu služe re-gulacioni planovi koji imaju zakonsku osnovu, a na terenu se odvijaju posve drugi procesi. Kako netko može dobiti priključak struje, vode, plina i drugih urbanih beneficija za nepostojeći obje-kat? Stalno smo u sistemu sanacija jer se stalno gradi na klizištima, zaštićenim zonama i sva planirana sredstva za izgradnju infrastrukture odlaze na sanacije privatnih investicija. Mislim da se socijalna politika mora odvojiti od realne investicione politike... Prema procjenama, samo za sanaciju bespravne izgradnje potrebna su dva godišnja budžeta Kantona.

S. R.: Zato predlažem obrazovanje građanina kroz priručnik za urbanizam, kojim bi se stvorili preduslovi za rad i bolji život u gradu. On bi bio pomoć ekspertima iz oblasti urbanizma, ali i široj javnosti, lokalnim vlastima, svakom gra-đaninu… napisan u obliku smjernica, razumljiv i pregledan. Trebao bi pokazati kako se može uvesti urbani red u grad.

47

DIKTATURA POTROŠNJE

15. USLUGE I ROBA:Pravo na širok spektar dostupnih usluga i robe odgovarajućeg kvaliteta, koje obezbjeđuju lokalne vlasti, privatni sektor ili kroz njihovo partnerstvo.


Predsjednik Sindikata policije Kantona Sara-

jevo Nedžib Đozo rekao je danas da cipele i

čizme koje je bivši ministar unutarnjih poslo-

va KS nabavio za 1.300 sarajevskih policaja-

ca u iznosu od 160.000 KM, ne ispunjavanju

policijske standarde. Đozo je na konferenciji

za novinare u Sarajevu kazao da s pravom

sumnja da u nabavci obuće za policajce ima

elemenata prevare i zlouporabe službenog

položaja. Dodao je da je dio policajaca bio

zadužio sporne cipele, ali su ih brzo vratili jer

se ispostavilo da propuštaju vodu ili se đo-

novi odljepljuju, prenijele su agencije. “Ovo

su cipele za jednokratnu uporabu, u njima se

na zapadu ljudi sahranjuju. Mi sumnjamo da

je ova roba uvezena iz Kine, a moguće čak i

da je kancerogena. Vještačenjem ove obuće

utvrđeno je da ona ne odgovara policijskim

standardima” – rekao je Đozo. “Cipele su

plaćane po 50, a čizme po 100 KM. U pripre-

mi je vještačenje uniformi i ostale opreme

koja je, uz obuću, ukupno koštala 1,3 miliona

maraka” – dodao je Đozo. [...]

(Izvor: Tuzlanski.ba)

UZALUDNI BIZNIS

A. T.: Na mnoge od tih objekata na Marindvoru gledam kao na uzaludne biznis pokušaje. Mi-slim na ove tržne centre. A, s druge strane, kad neku takvu građevinu pravdaju strukture vlasti, kažu kako će to doprinijeti gradu, doprinijeti vladi, doprinijeti nečemu. Ja ih gledam kao jef-tine trikove za stvaranje privida nekog boljeg života. Ne vjerujem da će se u skorije vrijeme ovdje ijedan ovaj tržni centar moći bilo kome isplatiti. Da bi oni mogli poslovati, tu se svakod-nevno mora trošiti velika količina novca, a toga novca nema. I svojim izgledom, većina njih je loša. Jednostavno, oni su dio tranzicije između socijalizma u kapitalizam, jedan od odraza te primarne, prvobitne akumulacije kapitala.

POTREBNO NAM JE MNOGO MANJE

N. N. Č.: Meni se čini da ovaj sistem u kome danas živimo većini ljudi pruža iluziju be-skrajnih mogućnosti. To onda, i za one koji mogu sve to postići, i za one koji ne mogu, po-stane model. I, odatle su neki više frustrirani,

48

jer taj model jednostavno ne mogu dostići. U ratu, u situaciji tih ograničenih mogućnosti, gdje, je život bio vođen načinom preživljava-nja – nije samo Sarajevo, ili ovaj rat – zaista ta nekakva kreativnost postane posebno bitna. Ne znam da li je to nekakav otpor, ono ljud-sko... A, s druge strane, barem ja mislim, to je-ste stanje jednog prostora slobode djelovanja, bez nekih postavljenih ograničenja i modela kako treba i šta to treba. Tako da ja vjerujem da mnogo ljudi tada jeste našlo nekakve pro-store djelovanja ili slobode djelovanja unutar toga... I, ne pokazuje li nam ta domišljatost i pronicljivost ljudi da su, ustvari, naše potrebe puno manje?

N. N. Č.: Moj cilj bi bio da živim u društvu sa drugačijim odnosima među ljudima, sa dru-gačijim modelima vrijednosti, sa drugačijim mogućnostima izborima, sa izborima u pravom smislu, ne sa izborima ovako kako se nude izbo-ri u smislu da uđete u šoping centar i možete da birate... Zašto je potrebno jednu te istu prodav-nicu imati na pet mjesta u gradu? Dakle, mnogo manje je čovjeku zaista potrebno nego što se nama čini.

X: ... Ne treba ti petnaest pasta za zube... šta će ti? Ako ta zadovoljava i dobra je. Ne treba ti petnaest sapuna. To je kao taj izbor marke, to je iluzoran izbor. Ne treba ti, zapravo, privid tog izobilja...

N. N. Č.: Ovakav načina života većina ljudi, ili

dobar dio ljudi jednostavno prihvata jer nema neke alternative. Puno puta razmišljam o tome koliko smo komotni postali u smislu da sve mora, sekiramo se ako nedjeljom nećemo moći kupiti, a živjeli smo godinama da su nedjeljom prodavnice bile zatvorene, da nećemo autom moći doći do pred vrata. Dakle, sve je moguće potpuno na drugi način.

49

SREDSTVA SLABE RASPODJELE

16. PRIRODNA BOGATSTVA I RESURSI:Pravo na upravljanje i gazdovanje lokalne vlasti lokalnim resursima i imovinom na racionalan, pažljiv, efikasan i pravedan način, na dobrobit svih građana.


Prema podacima Svjetske banke za 2012. go-

dinu, Bosna i Hercegovina je zemlja s najvećim

količinama pitke vode po glavi stanovnika u

regiji... BiH je s 9,461 kubičnih metara pitke

vode po glavi stanovnika prva u regiji i sedma u

Europi. BiH je po vodnim resursima bogatija od

mnogih zemalja svijeta uključujući Kinu, Fran-

cusku, Njemačku, Japan i Sjedinjene Američke

Države. Profesor na Prirodno-matematičkom

fakultetu u Sarajevu Muriz Spahić rekao je

kako bi se BiH morala puno više usredotočiti

na izvoz i distribuciju vode u zemlje koje su

deficitarne u području vodnih resursa.

(Izvor: Limun.hr)

Oko 43 posto teritorija BiH je prekriveno šu-

mama, odnosno skoro polovica ove zemlje

“obojena u zeleno.” Poređenja radi, Bosna

i Hercegovina je po šumskim bogatstvima

dva puta bogatija od Belgije, tri puta od

Danske i skoro četiri puta od Velike Britani-

je. Po bogatstvu šuma BiH je prva na Balka-

nu, sedma u Evropi. […] Međutim, šume se

u BiH koriste neracionalno i nesistemski, te

u raznim dijelovima zemlje postoji ilegalna

sječa. “Samo u Kantonu Sarajevo ima preko

stotinu nelegalnih mjesta za sječu. Također,

zvanično je u prošloj godini u Kantonu Sa-

rajevo oko 10.000 metara kubnih besprav-

no posječeno. Ali mislim da je ta cifra i tri

puta veća. Ako se ovako nastavi bespravna

sječa, onda će se smanjiti i zalihe šuma što

će uzrokovati i smanjenje prirodnih izvora

vode, nagli porast insekata, gljivičnih obo-

ljenja itd.”

(Izvor: Slobodna-bosna.ba)

50

ČIJA JE VODA?

S. A.: Voda je generalni problem. Ako ste bili, vidjeli ste, Bjelašnica je... isto k’o da je naselje… veze nema, ni stilom, ni gustinom, ni brojem. Naravno da se onda desilo da nam izvor Bosne zagade kad se, da oprostite, ona govna, a i one nafte tu slijevaju, a odatle pola Sarajeva pije vodu. Zato sam ja pesimista… evo, sve što ide-mo dalje – pesimističniji sam. Moj pesimizam dobiva potvrdu. Vi možete eventualno ispraviti jednu kuću. Ali, vi ne možete Bjelašnicu, ona je znači stvarno gotova, ne postoji način, bilo šta što je može spasiti...

ZEMLJIŠTE U GRADU PRIPADA SVIMA

N. Č.: Govorimo o prelasku društva između sistema, od društvenog vlasništva prema pri-vatnom vlasništvu. To je novi ciklus, vrijeme koje smo poznavali za vrijeme Austro-Ugar-ske. Prije toga, u osmansko vrijeme, zemljište u gradu je pripadalo svima. Onda je pripalo pojedincima, pa je opet, u socijalizmu, pripalo svima. I, sad, opet postaje vlasništvo pojedina-ca. E, sad, pitanje je kako privatni interes pro-fitira? Time što uzima od društvenog. Teško je profitirati na osnovu svoje imovine. Dakle, na svojoj imovini, na ovoj parceli mogu izgraditi hiljadu kvadrata, jer je to takva parcela, ali mogu otići u visinu, na deset hiljada kvadrata. To je već javni prostor, jer sam oduzeo sunce, jer sam oduzeo vjetar, jer sam oduzeo po-gled. Time je javni prostor narušen. A, onda, uzmem još zemljišta koje je javno da bih proširio svoju parcelu. I, to je praksa upravo Marindvora. Pa čak i, eto, Dom kulture Hra-sno, mjesna zajednica... kafana. To je jedna od najljepših mjesnih zajednica u gradu, sa naj-ljepšim pogledom na grad, koja je napravljena za sviju. To je prodato, ili kupljeno, i naprav-ljen je restoran. Pionirski centar stoji onako, bilo je prodato, sad je to na sudu... obdaništa su postala ambasade.

X: Da, ona najljepša obdaništa.

N. Č.: U socijalizmu su najljepše zgrade bile date djeci, a onda su najljepše zgrade date nekima,

gostima, ambasadama. To je uredu. Ali, i gost ima mjeru. Dakle, društveni prostor je nešto što je viđeno kao prostor manipulacije. Na njegov račun se ostvaruje profit privatnog interesa. To je evidentno. I to je rastuće, ne pokazuje nikakve znake promjene.

X: A, poslije toga, kako uopšte regulisati tu neku društvenu utopiju koja nije sebična?

N. Č.: To je samo stvar odluke. Dakle, grad Barcelona kontinuirano, svakodnevno, otku-pljuje zemljište. Čini ga društvenim. U Stock-holmu je 50 % gradske teritorije društveno jer kontinuirano otkupljuju. Dakle, kad društvo posjeduje zemlju – a takvo je Sarajevo bilo, ili, jugoslovenski i bosanskohercegovački grado-vi – to je pravi osnov za razvoj. To je filozofija socijalističkog sistema – zemljište u gradu pripada svima. I to je siguran osnov kvalitet-nog razvoja.

Y: Kakva je sad situacija u Sarajevu?

N. Č.: Loša. Od aktuelnih političara, ili onih iz zadnjih redova koji su naručeni, često ćete čuti: nije ovo više komunizam, prošlo je to vrijeme. Dakle to vrijeme se odbija po zadatku ili sa ciljem ostvarenja nekog drugog cilja. Jer, zašto ćemo mi otkupljivati zemljište ako nemamo viziju, nemamo takav cilj, ako ne znamo šta ćemo s tim?

Y: Ispada da se čitav ovaj projekat bavi nedostat-kom tog javnog dobra.

N. Č.: Nestajanjem. Nestaje, jer javno dobro je javna investicija.

N. Č.: E, sad, vraćamo se na to zemljište. Mislim da je tako jednostavno. Ako ja sada nemam para da napravim tu kuću, ili taj park, a zemljište je već moje, ja ću ga samo rezervisati. Ali umjesto toga da to zemljište sačuvam za neki ekonomski trenutak, mogu i ovako razmišljati… Ja ću to zemljište, koje je planirano za kulturni sadržaj, dati recimo vjerskim institucijama. Tako religiju vidimo

51

kao kulturu. Možemo. Ali, nije tako zamišljeno u planu. I onda ću, umjesto da napravim dom kulture ili biblioteku, napraviti vjerski objekat. I to jeste praksa.

N. Č.: Kao neizgrađeno ono je vrijednost, resurs za budućnost.

N. Č.: Postoje alati kako da se to može vrati u početnu situaciju. Ali taj alat se ne primjenju-je. Govorim o bespravnoj gradnji. Naprimjer, Marindvor je bespravna gradnja. Tu je gradnja legalizovana, ali, ako se čita urbanistički plan, ona je u suštini bespravna... Okvir za ovaj grad jeste da se ne smije zakloniti pogled na liniju neba. Tamo gdje se spaja priroda, planine, i nebo. Što znači, ne možemo praviti visoke zgrade. Visoka zgrada je i prepreka za kretanje vazduha kroz Sarajevo, u kotlini. Dakle, postoje okviri i preporuke koji definišu ovaj prostor. To se gazi. Zašto? Zato što je to prepreka za indivi-dualni profit.

X: Ti okviri, regule... osim tog prava na pogled... je l’ ima još nešto?

N. Č.: Pa ima, naravno. To se zove urbanistički uslovi. Dakle govorimo o gustinama, ili koefici-jentu izgrađenosti, to su neke numeričke vrijed-nosti koje definišu fizičku strukturu. Naravno da se uvijek može više profitirati kada te regule promijenimo, ali nije nam nigdje postavljeno u zadatak da više profitiramo. Postavljeno je u zadatak da svi profitiramo jednako, kao zajedni-ca. To jeste zapisano.

X: Koje godine je to zapisano?

N. Č.: 1986. Izmjena je napravljena ‘91. pa ‘95., ali to stoji tu. Možda se čak i izgubilo, mogao bih provjeriti, ali i ako se izgubilo, to nešto go-vori o aktuelnom razvoju. Zašto se izgubilo?

52

USLOVNA SLOBODA17. LIČNA REALIZACIJA:Pravo na gradske uslove koji pogoduju ostvarenju lične dobrobiti i individualnog društvenog, kulturnog, moralnog i duhovnog razvoja.


[…] U periodu od 2006. do 2012. godine BiH

je napustilo najmanje 150.000 mladih koji su

“trbuhom za kruhom” odselili u zemlje zapad-

ne Evrope, Sjevernu Ameriku i Australiju. Da

se broj onih koji planiraju da zauvijek napuste

BiH ne smanjuje, već naprotiv, povećava, po-

kazuje i to što je, recimo, u sličnom istraživanju

iz 2004. godine negdje oko 62 odsto ispita-

nih u dobi od 15 do 30 godine života izjavilo

da namjerava zauvijek otići iz BiH. Taj broj se

naglo povećao 2007. godine, kad je 77 odsto

izjavilo da u ovoj zemlji ne vide nikakvu per-

spektivu, dok prema posljednjim istraživanjima

iz decembra 2012. godine procenat onih koji

žele zauvijek napustiti BiH iznosi 81 odsto. [...]

(Izvor: Studomat.ba)

STIMULANS

N. N. Č.: Treba nuditi nekakve nove modele vrijednosti, modele izbora. Mislim da postoji masa ljudi, ne samo unutar ovog grada nego vjerovatno svuda, koji su jednostavno talentira-ni za neke stvari a koji svoje talente apsolutno nikada ne ostvare. To bismo možda mogli da

nazovemo sada popularnim terminom cjeloži-votnog obrazovanja, ali možda ja i ne znam baš dobro o čitavom tom konceptu. Dakle, nekakvi centri koji bi poslužili kao vrsta radionica za crtanje, za ples, za zabavu, za izradu nekih stvari, ali ne samo za studente i mlade ljude već i za ge-neracije srednjovječnih, starijih ljudi koji bi isto uzeli učešća… za one koji nisu bili u prilici da se obrazuju… za građane. Većina ljudi na čitavom ovom svijetu proživi svoj život i ne otkrije svoje specifične talente i ja stvarno mislim da otkri-vanje tih talenata vodi zadovoljnijim ljudima. Kad kažem drugačiji odnosi, onda mislim na to kako da imamo manje nasilno društvo, odno-sno, kako da stimulišemo ono dobro u ljudima. Jer ako je svako kao pojedinac zadovoljniji, biće bolji i prema svojoj okolini. Možda to djeluje previše idealistički, ali ja jednostavno mislim da je vrlo teško stvoriti drugačije odnose među ljudima ako se strukturalno ne ponude nekakvi novi modeli koji bi razvijali ljudske potencijale, učinili ih zadovoljnijim i dali im nekakvu lepezu većih stvarnih mogućnosti. Pojam sloboda izbo-ra se danas tako puno koristi, a izbori koje mi imamo – oni su jednolični.

53

PROSTOR NESLOBODE

F. Š.: Jedna od tih mojih ličnih utopija za Saraje-vo bi bila da nije stigmatiziran pos’o, ono čime se baviš. Da ljudi žive, ne u harmoniji, ne da se svi ljube i grle nego, ono, ne treba meni nikakvo poštovanje za u ovom slučaju ono što najbolje znam, za književnost.

X: A koliki je zapravo taj individualni potencijal za vlastito korigovanje? Emancipaciju?

F. Š.: Ja mislim da je, što se tiče toga, Sarajevo jedan od najtežih gradova za život. Znači, za tu vrstu emancipacije, umjetničke ili bilo kakve druge. Ja osjećam negdje dubinski da ja i dalje negdje pišem pod autocenzurom. Nije to loša autocenzura... ali jednostavno imam osjećaj da neću biti shvaćen. Ne kažem da sam ja genije, pa me niko neće razumjeti. Razumio bi, nije to... pričam istim jezikom, znam pisati… Ono, znam svaki pisac je manipulator, ako hoćeš... Ali ako ti pišeš vrlo jednostavno i precizno, i ako vidiš da neko ne može da razumije, to jest, krivo in-terpretira, iz hiljadu razloga – šta je onda s knji-ževnošću? Šta je s nečim što radiš šest-sedam godina, konstruišeš nešto pozitivno? Zato bih više govorio o prostoru neslobode. Znači, ti ov-dje moraš biti King-Kong u svemu. Ne govorim ja o sujeti. Moraš biti snažan, snažan, snažan da bi mogao uopšte da progovoriš o nečemu, da bi mogao da pišeš, da radiš, pa da to ljudi čitaju u nekim ogromnim količinama. I, to te opet ne može osloboditi.

F. Š.: Ti, ako si sam… ta suštinska samoća… imaš ti prijatelje... sve... ali nije ti to ta sloboda. Imaš ti tu podršku. Sve je tu super, ideš, putuješ stalno, preš’o si granice jezika i postaješ nečija svojina… ne znam... ljudi iz Njemačke. Svašta je tu, al’, suštinski, ja još smatram da je Sarajevo u tom, u kulturološkom smislu, u velikoj regresiji.

F. Š.: K’o što su oni idioti rekli da treba izmisliti nove naracije. Nema novih naracija. Razumiješ. Ako sam se ja u poeziji dotak’o svega – a jesam – šta ja dalje da radim? Neću ja stalno pisati o… o prosjacima, o invalidima čiji su patrljci metafora svijeta u kojem živimo. (Sebe citiram.) Iscrpiš

se. Ne možeš se ti stalno baviti tom sirotinjom, bijedom, ne znam, nekim kapitalizmom, tom nekom klasom. I da narediš nekom, da napraviš konkurs, evo: pišemo roman o nekoj, šta ja znam, novoj političkoj bošnjačkoj eliti. Tih 5 posto, dosadno je… ma ne zanima me uopšte… Prvo, taj dio ne želim viditi, to je moja slijepa mrlja.

EMOCIONALNO NESPOSOBNI

S. R.: Kada govorim o današnjim mogućnosti-ma civilizacije, mogućnostima našeg znanja, vidim da smo tijelo već manje-više napustili ali još nismo ušli u fazu duha, a da ne govori-mo o duši. Da bi poluprimitivni čovjek mogao upravljati, on napravi granice, njegov teritorij je ograničen sistem. Danas sofisticirani računalni sistemi… Eto, taj Facebook, on je tol’ko otvoren da je, ustvari, nekontrolirani haos u kojeg ste vi uvučeni sa različitim pozicijama. I još uvijek ne postoje programi koji će otvarati, nego samo oni koji zatvaraju sisteme da bi čovjek razumio. (…) Dio našeg mozga je sazdan na sjećanjima, a čovjek se sjeća samo kroz emotivnost, emotiv-ni doživljaj. Bilo koje novine kad čitate, ili kad pregledavate različite web-stranice, to je trpanje i opterećivanje mozga milionima informacija u kojima ne učestvuje emocija. Znači, mozak je prilagođen samo tom brzom jednostavnom slaganju ključnih riječi i rečenica.

S. R.: Površno ljudi pričaju šta je ljubav. Zašto površno? Ljubav, to nije neka korisnost. Ti u ljubavi daješ, daješ i ne čekaš nikad da će ti neko vratiti. Tu nema jao jesam se prešao, zaljubio sam se i potrošio vrijeme. Nema toga. Ali, na primjer, za razliku od ljubavi, brak je civilizacij-ski oblik, društvena institucija. Nije on bezveze, samo pitanje reprodukcije, nego se sklapa radi savladavanja problema. A problem ne možeš savladati tako što ćeš ga materijalno ili finan-sijski riješiti. Problemi su mnogo dublji. Briga za drugoga stoji iznad bilo kakvih finansijskih ograničenja. Ako nekome treba pomoć. To jesu bile te socijalističke utopije koje su negdje na sporednom kolosijeku i sad se negdje hlade...

Y: ... ili se možda ponovo pripremaju.

54

RANJIVOST KAO ODLIKA

X: Šta bi, po tebi, bila utopija moralnosti?

N. N. Č.: Unutar ovog mog istraživanja, na jed-nom višem teoretskom nivou, ja prosto hoću da registrujem i te granice govora. Recimo, mi ne možemo sad da kažemo da rat nije bio, o ratu se stalno priča. E, sad, pitanje je na koji se način priča i koliko individua može u tome da nađe paralelu sa svojim ličnim iskustvom. I koliko taj diskurs, koji postoji, njoj pomaže ili ne pomaže da to izartikuliše. Tako da sad, sedamnaest godi-na poslije, svako manje-više ima neki svoj uop-šteni način na koji će uspjeti da to izartikulira. Međutim, jako je teško i to na neki način stvarno postane tačka traume. E, sad, neki autori su govo-rili o tome kako bi ustvari ranjivost koja je, dakle, toliko raširena trebala da se prizna kao odlika čovjeka. Ako bi mi ranjivost, a ne neke druge mnogo moćnije ili agresivnije osobine uzeli kao odliku čovjeka, to bi totalno prevrnulo čitav mo-ralni sistem... to bilo dobro.

N. N. Č.: Ono što ja znam jeste da ovako nije dobro. Ja mislim da se granice govora mogu pomjerati, ali da bi se pomjerale treba okruženje koje to podržava, društvo koje otvara te neke tabu-teme. Ja mislim da na tome treba raditi i da postoje stvari koje se dešavaju na tom planu. E, sad, koliko su one jake, koliko su one moćne, to je drugo pitanje. Vjerovatno u sinergiji sa nekim drugim stvarima, umjetničkim, ovim i onim, mogle bi praviti promjene. To vjerovatno neće biti za mog ili naših života, ali ja stvarno vjerujem da su promjene moguće.

X: Desit će se promjene za vrijeme naših života ali pitanje je, s druge strane, šta je to normalno. Nova psihologija će asocijalne ili probirljive ljude proglasiti za... nefunkcionalne u društvu, što je katastrofa.

N. N. Č.: Da.

X: Znači, ako si stidljiv i ako nisi nešto pretjera-no socijalan, nisi funkcionalan za društvo. Onda bismo svi trebali da imamo aspiraciju da bude-mo u reality showovima.

IMATI VIZIJU ONOGA ŠTO ŽELIŠ

N. K.: Možeš napraviti neke stvari ali se moraš potruditi, moraš se boriti, moraš imati taj neki fajterski mentalitet, koji je ovdje postojao u ratu, ali u miru je vrlo sužen, vjerovatno zato što je neprijatelj apstraktan ili se čini manje konkretan. Da bi se angažovao u jednoj takvoj borbi moraš imati viziju šta želiš. Ne mora to biti neprijatelj, može biti projekat. Neprijatelj ti je administracija, glupost, korupcija koja će ti tražiti reket da bi ti nešto realizovao, napravio. Znači da postoji prostor i fizički i duhovni, za djelovanje, a to što ljudi ne djeluju više… Znam da ima neka apatija. Sjetim se Susan Sontag, koja je rekla – sad parafraziram – da je apatija vrlo često samo potisnuta trauma. Kao ono, ja moram nacrtati svijet oko sebe gorim nego što izgleda da bih opravdao svoje nedjelovanje.

KO ‘GURA’, DOČEKA

S. K.: Ja, ‘ajde prvo da kažem, nikada u životu uopšte nisam niti izgovarala riječ utopija, tek ovdje kod vas, prvi put. Isto kao što nikad ni-sam mislila da se muškarac ili žena razlikuju. To je očito bila greška. Ali pretpostavljam da bi sve ono što sam radila, od 1992., tada, u mo-mentu kada je trebalo da se počne, moglo da se nazove utopijom, a danas kad je realizovano ti vidiš da je to ustvari bilo moguće. Očito. A možda kad bi me neko stavio na kauč, zapravo bi shvatio da sam ja uvijek pričala o nečemu što je drugima svakako bilo neizvodljivo. Ne znam da li ćete izjednačiti riječ utopija sa ri-ječju neizvodljivost... ali, možda jedino i možeš napraviti nešto izvodljivo, tako što ne vidiš nje-nu neizvodljivost. Imam jednog informatičara sa kojim sarađujem, i kadgod mu postavim neki zahtjev šta u tom virtualnom svijetu da napravi, on kaže: To će tek biti izmišljeno za pet godina. Al’ će biti izmišljeno. Znači, imam neku sposobnost da predvidim to što će nastati. A uglavnom kad tražim da to izvede, to je svaka-ko nemoguće. Srećom, zbog neke loše osobine u karakteru, ja ne odustanem. Tako da sačekam taj moment da se to stvarno desi.

55

LOKOCENTRIZAM18. INTER-LOKALNA SARADNJA:U kojoj su građani slobodni i podsticani da direktno učestvuju u vanjskim odnosima njihove zajednice.


Želimo obavijestiti zainteresovanu javnost

o odluci Opštinskog suda u Sarajevu, koji je

proglasio krivima Leilu Šeper i Darijana Bilića

za remećenje javnog reda i mira. Izrečen im

je ukor i naloženo plaćanje sudskih troškova

jer su na Vilsonovom šetalištu neovlašteno

uklanjali nepropisno postavljene predizborne

plakate političkih stranaka, između ostalih i

Stranke demokratske akcije (SDA) na kojima

se nalazio Koldžo Nedžad tadašnji (i sadašnji)

načelnik Opštine Novo Sarajevo.

(Izvor: Akcija građana)

PRAVO NA ISTI PROSTOR

A. H.: Javni prostor je uvijek utopija i u onim društvima koja su najotvorenija, znamo da su tu negdje kamere i ako ništa drugo, neki čovjek iz prodavnice te posmatra. I to možda i jeste poenta javnog prostora. Problem je kad ne vidiš one koji te posmatraju, koji sjede u nekoj sobi i sa ekrana te gledaju. Kultiviranost ljudi i pro-izlazi iz toga da kad dođu na javno mjesto tu se odnose jedni prema drugima prema nekim pravilima. U momentu kad to nestane, onda je sve moguće.

X: Imamo li mi norme ponašanja?

A. H.: Norme uvijek postoje, samo, onaj koji dominira javnim prostorom on određuje nor-me. Pitanje je onda u kojoj mjeri se mi slažemo sa tim normama.

S. K.: I pitanje je, smije li se unositi ideološka pre-drasuda, ili neka druga emocija, u neki objekat i prostor? I zašto ja, sad, ne mogu da koristim BBI? Zato što su prostori markirani. Tamo ima mesdžid, nema mesdžid, nema alkohol, ima al-kohol… i time je tom prostoru skinuta njegova centralna funkcija. Čuj, emocija prema objektu. K’o da smo u nekoj najstrašnijoj diktatori... A naša trauma je da bi oni eventualno mogli zavladati. Ona dolazi iz projekcije prošlosti, sadašnjosti i bu-dućnosti. Ja mislim da se to ne bi smjelo događati. Jer ako i mi to radimo, ‘ajd’ recimo kao pozitivnija strana grada i svijeta, onda će oni biti još gori. Znači, moramo imati pravo na taj isti prostor.

X: Predrasude koje se zapravo vrte i produžava-ju sa svakom novom situacijom.

S. K.: To, k’o Crnogorci, oni imaju bijele i zelene.

56

I kažu, kad idu ulicom, ovi kafići su za bijele, ovi za zelene. Svi su podijeljeni. Ako si zeleni, ne daj ti bože da uđeš u bijeli, napraviš odmah inci-dent. A, to je stvarno isto i u BBI-u. U Beogradu, ulica sponzoruša: fenomenalno, restorani, kafići. Ja odmah sjela, ne znam istoriju, kad mi prijatelj kaže: Ne, tamo ni mrtav, tu moja noga kročiti neće. Šta je bilo? – Tu su sponzoruše. Nisam ni znala… za sponzoruše. Da li je to i sa drugim gradovima u svijetu, ali eto, kod nas očito, ima svoje tragove.

S. K.: Procesi moraju biti paralelni. Ako su oni jači – a uvijek su jači od nas – Al Kaida smisli ići na one nebodere i to izvede. ‘Ajde da mi izvede-mo u New Yorku pozitivan efekat kakav želimo. Mi to ne možemo, a oni su iz pećine srušili dva nebodera. Znači, oni su uvijek u prednosti. Zna-ju to da izvedu. A mi, nekako, moramo dati do-prinos našom stranom. Ako se isključimo, samo su oni ostali. Tako ja mislim, što ne znači da je ovo sve tačno. Šta kažeš na ovo? Pratiš?

OTVARANJE

N. N. Č.: Taj trend idealiziranja prošlosti, ili ne znam kako bih to nazvala, on ustvari popu-njava onaj prostor gdje bi trebala da nastane imaginacija nečeg novog... Ja mislim da se mi trebamo otvoriti prema svijetu, da trebamo više da znamo o svijetu, i to upravo prema onom dijelu svijeta kojim nismo. Dakle, da nemamo opet taj jedan model. Nećemo mi naći negdje kompletan model koji možeš copy – paste ov-dje. Ali previše insistiramo na tome kako smo specifični. Ja, generalno, mislim da jeste bitno tražiti razlike – mislim da smo sad nekako došli do faze da smo potpuno previdjeli slič-nosti unutar nekog svijeta koji mi smatramo da nama nije relevantan jer, bože, mi smo imali drugačiji, specifičan socijalizam, pa je bio rat, pa je sad sve specifično u smislu kako je država organizirana, i tako dalje. Ali, nekako mi stalno stremimo ka nekom holističkom pristupu, da se, ono, potpuno, nađe neki model. Meni je možda i antropologija u tom smislu stvarno pomogla da pokušam da smanjim ciljeve i da gledam na neke manje stvari...

ZAHTJEVNA OPTIKA

N. K.: Primjećuju se pomaci u palanci, bez ob-zira što je potrebna zahtjevna optika da bi se oni vidjeli. Neću reći mikroskopska, ali treba povećalo... Stvari će se mijenjati nabolje, ja sam siguran. Ne zato što vjerujem u duh, u čudo bosanskog otpora, nego zato što smo mi geo-grafski locirani u tački koja, htjeli mi ili ne htjeli, gura prema Evropskoj uniji i naprosto zato što smo siva zona u raznoraznim, sigurnosnim, religijskim, mnogim drugim perspektivama a siva zona je uvijek ono što prirodno treba da se promijeni. (…) Tako da to postoji kao težnja, da se čitav prostor uvuče u Evropsku uniju, pa ma-kar i kao B-, C-, D-zemlje.

BIH ADMISTRATIVNI CENTAR ZA EU

Z. Ć.: Ja bih samo okrenuo situaciju. Imamo dovoljno prostora, a kad bismo pristali da... bu-demo administrativni centar Evropske unije... riješili bismo problem.

Z. Ć.: Ja sam to predlagao, da ponudimo Evrop-skoj uniji da mi budemo administrativni centar, cijela Bosna i Hercegovina, ionako nas 70 % radi u administraciji, a ovako bismo svi. I, svi iz Evropske unije, kad im treba lična dođu kod nas.

X: A mi nismo u Evropskoj uniji?

Z. Ć.: Mi smo administrativni centar.

X: Samo smo centar, mi servisiramo njih al’ ni-smo nikad ušli u Evropsku uniju?

Z. Ć.: Nema potrebe. Plate, dolaze kod nas, mije-njaju lične... a sve asfaltirano, jeb’o to. Ima mjesta za parking kol’ko hoćeš.

Y: Je l’ pričaš o utopiji?

57

FISKALNO ODUZIMANJE

19. FINANSIJSKI MEHANIZMI I STRUKTURE:Koji omogućavaju lokalnim vlastima da pronađu finansijska sredstva neophodna za ostvarivanje prava definisanih u ovoj Deklaraciji.


Državni službenici, prema posljednjem izvješta-

ju, samo u prošloj godini potrošili su 18,5 milio-

na maraka na nabavke novih vozila, registraciju

i osiguranje, gorivo, održavanje, pranje i parki-

ranje. Ni fudbalski stadion ne bi bio dovoljan

da se parkiraju svi njihovi službeni automobili,

kojih, prema izvještaju revizora, ima više od 3,5

hiljade, a vrijednost im je 25 miliona maraka.

Pored toga, domaći političari i državni službeni-

ci troše ogromne količine novca na taksi usluge

i rent-a-car. Tako su, prema jednom istraživanju,

novcem koji su za jednu godinu dali za taksi

25 puta mogli obići cijelu zemaljsku kuglu. Sve

to u državi čiji su građani, prema svim stati-

stikama, najsiromašniji u regionu. [...] Prema

nekim procjenama, od tri KM dnevno živi svaki

peti stanovnik BiH, a njih oko 20.000 jednom

dnevno jede u narodnoj kuhinji. [...] “Dok god

čelni ljudi tih institucija, ministri, direktori itd.,

ne budu snosili konsekvence, biće tako. A kada

samo jedan od njih bude odgovarao, i moralno

i politički i kazneno, mislim da će to biti početak

kraja ove priče”, rekli su iz nevladine organiza-

cije Centri civilnih inicijativa. [...]

(Izvor: Tuzlanski.ba)

ALATI ZA PROMJENU

X: Kako ti gledaš na urbanistički razvoja Saraje-va? To je stihijsko razvijanje, ili?

N. Č.: Mislim da ga riječ strašno mnogo bolje opisuje. Ovo što se događa, ne samo u Sara-jevu, jeste stihijsko, u smislu da nije u skladu sa planom. To je vrlo jednostavna definicija ali, postoji trik da se planovi prilagođavaju toj stihiji i, onda, na kraju za tu stihiju kažemo da je planska. U razgovoru sa ljudima iz prakse (i to je jedno čudno okruženje) postoji sasvim sigurno grupa ljudi koji ovakav razvoj, od 1992. do danas, označavaju kao neopravdani. Ali, postoji i grupa ljudi koji ga podržavaju, zato što nemaju kriterije, ili zato što imaju kriterije. Ja ih, moram priznati, ne razumijem. I to me zbunjuje, zato što postoje ljudi iz struke koji će se složiti da je ovakav razvoj bar prihvatljiv. Prvo imate nešto što je razrušeno, kao ideja, a onda se na to nadograđuje nešto što je, recimo, stihijski ili što je sasvim sigurno strašno. Dakle, kompleksnost problema je još uvijek rastuća. Paralelno sa tim, razmišljamo o nekoj buduć-nosti, a ništa ne ukazuje da se gradi ili odlučuje

58

prema toj budućnosti. Naši urbanistički planovi su, rekao bih, izvrsni. Oni u sebi sadrže ekspli-citno opredjeljenje za opravdan razvoj, za lijep razvoj, za razvoj prostora i čovjeka, ali se ne realizuju tako. I, onda, čovjek počinje manje razmišljati. Razmišlja o nekim tačkama umjesto o sistemu, jer sistem je očito prekompleksan, prejak, ne pokazuje nikakve pravce razvoja koji se mogu prihvatiti kao opravdani, kao dobri u najširem smislu.

N. Č.: Dakle, šta uraditi? Ili, ne razmišljati o sistemu, manje razmišljati o sistemu, ili se mak-simalno – a mislim da je to odgovor – posvetiti svom djelovanju. Postoji mogućnost, da se iz zbira malih tačaka proizvede kvalitet, organizo-vano, neorganizovano, sasvim svejedno. Dakle, kako postupati? U ovom trenutku, ili barem već deset godina, postupati prema individualnim kriterijima u svom stvaranju i raditi ono u šta čovjek vjeruje, sa argumentima koji potvrđuju to vjerovanje, i nadati se da će se eventualno u tom zbiru ponavljajuće dobrih, pojaviti kvalitet. Dakle, teoretski je moguće ali praktično, ne znam da li je u našem slučaju ostvarivo.

N. Č.: Ali sad, moram priznati da sam se umo-rio. I postavio sam sebi tezu da projicirati ili razmišljati o budućnosti sa stanjem kakvo jeste, sa nasljeđem kako jeste, mirnodopskim alatima nije moguće ili je iscrpljujuće dugoročno. I tako, to liči na jednu planersku ili urbanističku here-zu, ali ja još uvijek ne mogu da prihvatim da se od mene, kao eventualnog planera, očekuje da nekim jednostavnim, svakodnevnim alatima, učestvujem i proizvodim budućnost. Ako mi je za osnovu dato nešto što je promijenjeno straš-nim alatima, hoću i ja tako snažne alate da bih pravio promjenu. (...) I onda sam rekao nema više nade, nema smisla. Da li to znači da ništa više ne postoji? Ne znači. Ali, nada je... istrošena. Nego, evo, kažem, možda, zato, hvala vam na tom pitanju... Tih tačaka... da se nešto napravi.

N. Č.: (...) 1997. je bila jedna akademska radio-nica, u Münchenu, zvala se Vizije za budućnost. Odnosila se na Sarajevo. Negdje pedesetak stu-denata, pet nastavnika. Jedan strašan trenutak,

malo iza rata i, neću predugo, samo ću zaključiti. Svi učesnici iz Sarajeva su odbili naziv vizija za Sarajevo, odbili su vizionarsko razmišljanje, smatrajući da to ne može biti tako jer postoji nešto što je aktuelno, nešto što smo eventualno imali, kvalitet koji je srušen i treba ga popraviti.

N. Č.: Tada su sigurno bile bolje mogućnosti, jer to je još bilo stanje koje je bilo k’o vruće, moglo se obrađivati.

N. Č.: Je l’ sad vrijeme za vizije? Jeste, uvijek. Po definiciji vizije nisu realne, ali u sebi, sasvim sigurno, nose suštinu željene realnosti, značenja budućnosti i grada i življenja... Vizije su predu-slov, ali nam nedostaju snaga, alati, masovnosti, i više vjere. Praksa jednostavno obeshrabruje... A čovjek traži neku inspiraciju, motivaciju.

URBANISTIČKI PLAN JE UTOPIJA

N. Č.: Marindvor je prostor koji je bio nedovolj-no razvijen, podrazvijen, dijelom zapušten. Ali, zapušten i nerazvijen zbog brige o budućnosti tog prostora, imajući na umu njegov značaj. Regulacioni plan eksplicitno govori o ovom prostoru kao vezi – kako oni to zovu – urbanog tkiva, između nečega što je austrougarsko nasli-jeđe i nečega što je naslijeđe modernog perioda. Dakle, govorimo o – slagat ću – evo, recimo, 15 konkursa. Nikad prva nagrada. Uvijek je nešto tu falilo da bude kao najbolje rješenje, željeno rješenje. I, koliko znam, tek pred rat kolega Polić je dobio, možda, drugu nagradu i to je bio pro-jekat koji se trebao realizovati. Imao sam priliku da vidim zapisnik, diskusije i stručna mišljenja iz nekih sedamdesetih-osamdesetih, vezanih za radove Marindvora, i postidio sam se kad sam vidio sa kolikom posvećenošću i ozbiljnošću se pristupalo razvoju i razmišljanju o nekom prostoru, za razliku od ovog danas, kada se brzo donose odluke.

N. Č.: Sada, na javnoj raspravi – svaki urba-nistički plan ima javnu raspravu – svaki glas građana koji može uticati na produženje izrade plana ili donošenje odluke, bez obzira je li afir-mativan ili negativan, označen je riječima: Vi ste

59

protiv razvoja, koje dolaze negdje iz pozadine te publike. To je za mene indikativno jer, požuriva-ti otvara mogućnost greške. E sad, to je pitanje, s jedne strane imam Zavod za planiranje, koji i dokazano, ima arhiva, ima htijenja da čuva grad, u smislu da se grad razvija kako je planirano. Ali instrumenti su takvi da mogu eventualno ostvariti deset posto od tog štićenja plana. Ostali dio, jednostavno ne mogu, jer su pod ozbiljnim pritiskom prijetnji ako ne proizvedu plan tako. Dakle, prijedlog i projekat razvoja je donešen pod pritiskom, pritiskom profita. Samim tim, urbanistički plan je utopija, sam po sebi.

N. Č.: Ekonomija ne vidi dugoročno. Osnov za razvoj jeste prostor. Ako ga nemate, vi je nećete moći napraviti, a ako ga imate moći ćete napra-viti u onom trenutku kad budete mogli. I zato je velika borba oko parcele Koncertne dvorane, koliko god se ja ne slažem uvijek sa samim pro-jektom ili sa sadržajem. Da li je ta parcela pala? Ne znam tačno, ali znam da su kontinuirani pritisci da ta parcela promijeni namjenu, da se otkupi, odnosno da se i ona izgradi ne u skladu sa regulacionim planom, nego u skladu sa neči-jim individualnim interesom.

KADA GRAD BUDE DRUŠTVENA KATEGORIJA

N. Č.: Naša utopija je postojala. Ona je imala svoje slabosti i svoje snage, isto kao i svaka druga utopija. Al, to je bila naša utopija. I ona je bila realnost koju su ljudi doživljavali na jedan način. Ali, sada, u razgovoru se može prepo-znati da su značajni elementi te prošlosti i dalje utopija, i treba ih proizvesti. Kažem proizvesti, jer mislim da je mnogo prihvatljivije nego kad kažemo vratiti, od toga se ljudi povlače. Šta to radite, vraćate se socijalizmu? Ne vraćamo se u socijalizam, idemo u socijalizam.

N. Č.: Naprimjer, prošla iskustva lokalne zajed-nice su potvrđeno dobra… ono što mi zovemo mjesne zajednice. Dakle, u to vrijeme svako je, zavisno od godišta, znao svoj domet, gdje su druga raja, gdje će ga razbiti, gdje može biti siguran, koga manje zna. Ja ne vjerujem da se čovjek toliko promijenio da traži neku drugačiju

zajednicu od onoga što jeste mjesna zajednica. Po definiciji i po praksi.

N. Č.: Čitava Evropa, i čitav kapitalizam, prak-tično se kreće prema nekom socijalizmu. To je evidentno. Al’ to nije taj socijalizam koji mi po-znajemo. To je drugi socijalizam.

N. Č.: I, naravno, ekonomija koja mora pot-puno da promijeni svoju prirodu. Zapad demokratiju vidi kao integralni dio otvorene ekonomije. Dakle, to dvoje mora ići zajedno. A, otvorena ekonomija je sama po sebi destruk-tivna, po definiciji je sebična i kratkoročna i orijentisana isključivo prema profitu. I zato se u Evropi pojavljuju autoriteti koji jednostavno kažu: ekonomija ne može biti mjera svih stvari. E, sad, sa ovim društvom, razmišljajući samo ovakvom ekonomijom, ja nemam kapacitete da napravim nikakvu viziju, nikakvu budućnost. Jer, u takvom sistemu ja ne odlučujem, odlučuje ekonomija. A, ta ekonomija nije nematerijalna. To su ljudi. Oni čine tu ekonomiju. To je koli-čina ljudi koja vidi grad kao ekonomsku kate-goriju. Kada grad bude društvena kategorija, odnosno ako se odlučimo da je to tako, onda postoji osnova da vjerujemo da ćemo napraviti nešto što je jedno okruženje, grad, ideja, kojom čovjek može biti zadovoljan. Vjerovatno ne pretjerano zadovoljan, zbog sistema, jer uvijek mora da nešto nije u redu.

X: Koliko uopšte fizička struktura može uče-stvovati u utopiji?

N. Č.: Ne može nikako dok ne definišemo utopiju.

X: Aha, dok taj cilj ne postavimo...

N. Č.: Pa naravno. Po definiciji, utopija je nešto što je neostvarivo, ali, to neostvarivo moramo opisati da bi pošli prema tamo. Ima jedna fina Senekina rečenica: Ako ne znaš u koju luku ideš, ni jedan vjetar nije povoljan. To je tako. Moramo znati u koju luku idemo, kakva je utopija. Onda ćemo izabrati vjetar.

60

ZAPETLJANI U IDENTITETU

20. JEDNAKOST:Gdje lokalne vlasti obezbjeđuju da se navedena prava primjenjuju na sve građane, bez obzira na pol, uzrast, porijeklo, vjeru, društveni, ekonomski ili politički položaj, fizički ili psihički nedostatak.


U četvrtak 19. travnja 2012. na Filozofskom fa-

kultetu u Sarajevu organizirano je dobrovoljno

darivanje krvi, a prije samog darivanja studenti

su morali ispuniti formular Zavoda za transfuzij-

sku medicinu FBiH. U dijelu “Osobe koje ne tre-

baju davati krv” navedene su “osobe koje imaju

povremene ili stalne seksualne kontakte s ho-

moseksualcima”, što je naljutio troje studenata.

Studentice Lamija Topčagić i Nedžmina Šeta i

student Amar Numanović obratili su se deka-

novom uredu te ukazali na diskriminatorsku

stavku u formularu. Rečeno im je da fakultet

nije odgovoran za sadržaj formulara, a studen-

ti su počeli upozoravati ostale da je formular

diskriminatoran i suprotan temeljnim ljudskim

pravima. Nakon toga, jedan od bolničara fizički

je nasrnuo na Amara Numanovića, a umiješala

se i knjižničarka s fakulteta, nazvavši studente

narkomanima i propalim studentima. Sporno

pravilo kojim je osobama istospolne seksualne

orijentacije zabranjeno darivanje krvi postoji

i u većini država Evrope, a Velika Britanija je

prije pola godine učinila prvi korak naprijed po

tom pitanju, uvođenjem uvjeta da istospolnog

seksualnog odnosa nije bilo u posljednjih 12

mjeseci. Jasno je da se radi o diskriminatornoj

i zastarjeloj praksi, koja datira iz osamdesetih

godina, jer se osobe rizičnog seksualnog pona-

šanja nalaze među heteroseksualcima jednako

kao i među homoseksualcima.

(Izvor: Danas.net.hr)

OSLOBOĐENI OD SVEGA

S. M.: Ja bih volio da, prosto, kad neko hoda Ferhadijom, i drekne Milane!, da se pola ulice ne okrene da vidi ko je taj Milan. Isto kao što mi je utopija, da kad hodaš Knez Mihajlovom i drekneš Muhamede!, da te pet ljudi ne pogleda. To je prosto taj registar. Ne kažem ja da postoji... fašizam, ali da budemo...

X: ... oslobođeni tih predrasuda.

S. M.: Oslobođeni bilo čega, razumiješ. Da kada prođe šest onih Hare-Krišna likova sa sve in-strumentima, da šest baba ne kaže: Bože mili, šta je ovo? To je meni utopija. Da budemo oslobo-đeni sebe. I, predrasude.

X: Ustvari, tebi bi utopija bila neko društvo gdje je pristojnost jedina prihvatljiva konvencija.

S. M.: Da. I zapravo bih tu samo uvukao jedan elementarni princip iz ljudskih prava: da moja prava prestaju tamo gdje tvoja počinju. Da postoji samo ta jedna rečenica, da postoji set onoga što je elementarna pristojnost. Dakle, ne želim da me uzrujava postojanje drugog i dru-gačijeg. To je za mene potpuni poraz, tu mislim da urbs umire.

X: Da... interesantno je pričati o ljudskim pravi-ma kao utopiji.

61

Z: Interesuje me... kako je moguće realizovati ih?

S. M.: Ljudska prava?

S. M.: Ima kao neki kvazi-recept. Stvar je u obra-zovanju. Ogromni problem našeg školstva je da mi, zapravo, imamo jako izraženu obrazovnu komponentu, a odgojne nema. Problem je to što se ljudska prava predaju u školama kao dogma katoličke crkve, kao katehezis. Moraš da naučiš napamet jednu knjigu, iz koje na kraju godine nešto polažeš, pa dobiješ neku ocjenu. Kultura ljudskih prava je nešto što treba da bude pred-met osam godina, a ne u smislu konvencije, de-klaracije, protokola, zakona, dakle, instrumenta koji tebe obavezuje da nešto uradiš jer u protiv-nom ćeš biti sankcionisan. Znaš, na engleskom to ljepše zvuči, free, kao freedom. To je zapravo i najteže postići – ličnu slobodu. Ti možeš uzeti pušku i osloboditi nešto. To je u redu. Ali, sebe osloboditi, to je užasan posao. To je strašno.

SVAKO IMA PRAVO DA SE KREĆE I DA BUDE KRETEN

S. M.: Meni se strašno svidio jedan grafit koji mož-da najbolje oslikava to naše stanje. Izašao je prije par godina u Oslobođenju, na Dan ljudskih prava, i kaže: Svako ima pravo da se kreće i da bude kreten. To meni tako super odslikava ljudska prava, koja uvijek dolaze ono aktivno-pasivno – svako ima pravo da bira i da bude izabran. Svako ima pravo da se kreće i da bude kreten – to je neprevodivo.

DEKODIRANI IDENTITETI

S. M.: Ako pričaš o identitetu i konstrukciji identiteta i transformaciji identiteta, prvo što moramo zaista sami sebi da priznamo, a to je ono najteže: mi kad pričamo o identitetu, pričamo o nekom dominantnom identitetu. A nekako uvijek zaboravljamo da imamo u sebi mnogostruku kohabitaciju identiteta. Dakle, ne jednog nego 59. To je taj minimum. I sada, dakle, kad pričamo o jednom, previše se identificiramo s tim, kao, to je moj primar-ni identitet. Ja zapravo mislim da primarni identiteti ne postoje, postoje kohabitacijski. I, zapravo, situacija je ta koja tebi izvlači jedan

od identiteta na površinu. Ja to najviše volim svesti na književne likove. Prosto shvatiti da u nama postoji bar pet dominantnih identiteta, a pritom nisu ultimativno katolički, pravoslavni, jevrejski, srpsko-hrvatski, bošnjački… nego u svakom od nas živi i Prometej i Hamlet i Nora i Melquiades. Mi jesmo Prometeji, mi damo kao neku vatru a poslije zakovani na stijenu kuka-mo – šta je meni ovo uopšte trebalo. Dakle, ono put u pakao... Često sami sebe sažalijeva-mo – to je jedan prometejski identitet. U nama živi i Nora: živjeti negdje drugdje, gdje je tebi ljepše i bolje s nekim drugim, trećim, petim, uraditi nešto što je zapravo neka tvoja potreba, a za šta će te zajednica osuditi. A, imamo pravo i da budemo Hamleti, da zarad nekog većeg cilja one vrlo sitne, lične porive zamaskiramo u slavnu rečenicu Biti ili ne biti pitanje je sad. I sad, najdominantniji je onaj koji mislim da svi mi najviše zlorabimo, to je Melquiades, znači iluzija. Nekako mislim da mi previše živimo u iluziji. Mi smo majstori iluzije. Pazi, to je priča o poricanju – kad pričaš sa svim svojim pri-jateljima, niko nema problema sa alkoholom, ničiji tata nije nervozan, ničija mama nije zla, mi smo svi happy, imamo dovoljno novca. Ni-kad nećeš priznati da ti fali dinar u džepu, nego ćemo uvijek reći da smo zaboravili kreditnu karticu, da nismo stigli do banke, a prosto, ono, nemamo love, znaš… Nema: Ne možemo večeras u kafanu, nemam love, nego ćemo reći

62

da imamo gripu. (...) Ja sam, naprimjer, recimo, dosta pričao sa bivšim logorašima. Oni su dugo bili zakovani u jednom identitetu – biti logoraš. Zapravo je njima dugo trebalo da se osvijeste da su oni bivši logoraši. Dakle, nije on sad u logoru. U prostornom svijetu on je i deda i otac i neki employee i neki kreativni radnik, razumi-ješ. Živimo u tom nekom jednom identitetu i grčevito ga se držimo. I prosto, mi na Balkanu, volimo da budemo žrtve. Balkan je najveće viktimološko društvo koje postoji.

S. M.: Moj, možda, najdominantniji identitet je – bibliotekar, neko ko se bavi posredovanjem ka zna-nju. A, onda, dolaze svi ovi ostali: biti otac je prosto funkcija koju ostvaruješ, ne znam, četiri sata dnev-no; biti prijatelj je dva sata dnevno... Zapravo ti identiteti nisu, na neki način, uvijek prisutni.

S. M.: Zapravo riječ je o sposobnosti ljudske živo-tinje... da se adaptira. I mislim da smo se mi ovdje, zapravo, odrekli tog mehanizma adaptabilnosti.

BEZ MANIPULACIJE

F. Š.: Možda je globalni fenomen to, da nema poštenja, pravde... Ja sam tol’ko pis’o, tol’ko me zanimala, ta socijalna pravda i... Ja to nisam konstruis’o… da bi onda ljudi mene, u nekim krugovima pitali: Kako si to vidio? Drugi ljudi to ne vide.

X: Šta konkretno?

F. Š.: Socijalna slika, bijeda. Ja sam im’o tu hiper-humanističku ideju, ono, ne znam, književnost će spasiti svijet, mislim, riječi, vjera, etika, iznad svega... Bio sam neki radikalni ljevičar, anaciona-lan, štagod to značilo. Ta neka želja da prevaziđeš nacionalne norme, neke podjele. Naravno, kroz tu fazu prođeš, ali nije to nestalo. Vidi se to u lite-raturi i tome čim se baviš, ali, kako da živiš sam...

X: Znači, moraš se identificirati, nekako uz neki kolektiv?

F. Š.: Ne moram ja, nikako. Ne. Al’ ako imaš ti neku ideju... naravno da je želiš nekako

proširiti... poslije nekog vremena dosadit će nam. Mijenjamo svijet a sjedimo vazda u istoj stolici. Hajmo na ulicu, hajmo nešto.

Y: Kako da se promjeni, a da to nije politički?

F. Š.: Mi dolazimo u neke godine, ono, četr’est i nešto... stvari se mijenjaju i u pozitivnom smislu i u negativnom. Znaš, ono, ne možeš ti biti buntovan stalno na isti način. Znam te neke ljevičare, ubiše se da budu nešto... za-jebani. Čitaju te neke teoretičare, koje sam i ja čitao. To je meni malo dosadilo... Bio sam jednom s nekim likom, on se ne bavi ničim, on živi. I odemo mi u kafanu kod Centrotransa, iza Markala. Neke kolibe. Kaže on meni ‘Ajd ovdje ćemo... I odemo mi tamo, a tu sjede neki radnici, ogromni ljudi, piju velike pive. Ja se tad fur’o nešto na novomarksizam... i sad, u nekom momentu, ja se potpuno iznervir’o... oko vlade. I, nekako, postao potpuno domi-nantan... u prostoru. Prvo sam ja njima... ono Vi ste radnici, što ste glasali za njih? Pokazujem im... I ja sam bio u ratu, šta hoćete... Jedan viče Care, svaka čast! Odmah ja dobijem pristali-ce. Oni su bili potpuno hipnotisani. Naravno, moja energija je morala jednom pasti. U jed-nom momentu sam samo osjetio kako više ne vladam tim prostorom... Konobarica je nešto rekla, jedan taksista je nešto dobacio. Ja se zakačio s taksistom. Kaže Ko je ovaj slučaj, šta je on, drži nam govor već dva sata? (...) Svuda sam ja išao, prič’o ljudima, sve što sam pro-čit’o, vez’o... O SDA, o Aliji, ratu… Šta ste vi, vi niste ništa, vi niste radnici, što se ne borite, što ste glasali za nacionalne stranke da vas guze. I nekako je to išlo dok nije došlo vrijeme za strateško povlačenje. (...) Kad gledam sad ljude koji tako razmišljaju, smiješno mi je. Mislim, treba tako kad imaš, ne znam, 25 do 30, onda poslije... Ne želim nikoga da tjeram ni u šta, čak ni u ovu neku utopiju. To je već, malo nasilno. Možda na neke suptilne načine... da nema manipulacije.

63

DRUGAČIJI (RODNI) ODNOSI

N. N. Č.: Kad govorim o nekakvom manje nasilnom, društvu bez nasilja, odnosno druš-tvu bez nasilja, sa drugačijim odnosima, i ‘vamo-tamo, ja stvarno mislim da to ima svoje referentne tačke u mnogim društvima, da to postoji. Ali, nisam razmišljala ni o jednom konkretnom društvu vezano za to. A, kad ka-žem drugačiji odnos, ja prvenstveno mislim drugačiji rodni odnos.

X: U kategorizaciji te promjene međuljudskih odnosa, da li je izjednačavanje u tim nekim rodnim kategorijama, možda, pozicija za neko utopijsko razmišljanje?

N. N. Č.: Pa, jeste pozicija za utopijsko raz-mišljanje, pošto niko od nas nije živio u takvim drugačijim odnosima – možda u Švedskoj... Ali, vrlo teško je uopšte zamisliti kako bi svijet izgle-dao i kako bi život izgledao ako bi smo prihva-tili drugačije forme odnosa. Ja često mislim da moralni sistem treba da se promijeni. Ali, ako ja već unaprijed mislim da je tako nešto apsolutno nemoguće, nikad se neće ni promijeniti, je li.

N. N. Č.: Mi, s jedne strane, imamo problem da se emociji pripiše riječ, da se verbalno izrazi. S druge strane je nepostojanje pravog diskursa o nečemu... Ja sam preko jedne vježbe, sa đacima, njima htjela da pokažem koliko to utiče jedno na drugo, da propitam da li misle kad bi o odre-đenim stvarima postojao diskurs da bi odnos prema njima bio drugačiji, počev od seksualno-sti do drugih tema. Spominjem to zato što sam tokom te vježbe, na neki način pokušala da ih stimuliram da zamišljamo drugačiji odnos. I, mislim, i njima i meni – ne izdvajam ja sebe – to je toliko bilo teško. Mislim, gdje naći, referentnu tačku? Tako da bi trebalo, možda kroz medije, raditi na tome da se stimulira imaginacija.

ZAMISLI DA BIRAŠ SVOJE PRETKE

F. Š.: Jesam čito Andrića, to volim... ali nije to knji-ževnost, meni je Tolkien draži. Kad je Andrić dobio Nobelovu nagradu, Tolkien je bio u konkurenciji i Andrić ga je do nogu potuk’o. Al’, vidi ko je na kraju

isplivao nakon pedeset godina. Tolkien je ipak dio opšte, svjetske kulture. Možda je to pop-kultura, šta je loše u pop-kulturi? Andrić je najčitaniji, on je super, ali ja ne želim takvu projekciju. On je stalno u toj vrsti prošlosti...

F. Š.: Meni je Kiš najdraži pisac od svih tih andrića i tako to. Kiš i Borges... zato što oni imaju taj kon-cept enciklopedijskog bavljenja literaturom. On je bitan zato što ti omogućava da se baviš mnogim stvarima iz drugog vremena. Zato Alef i postoji. Alef... tačka u vremenu i prostoru u kojoj se sve vidi u istim momentima, sve bitke su nanizane. Mi nikad nismo imali dobro napisanu istoriju, ona je uvijek bila na krivim osnovama. Prvo, kasno smo sazreli kao nacija, kao konstrukt. Jugosloveni. Iz razloga... carstva... ovog, onog, zbog svega... tako misle i u Irskoj, u Latviji, u Litvi. Svi misle da su oni tromeđa carstava i događaja... Znači, volim Borgesa zato što – treba znati citirati. Citat treba biti nužno potreban tekstu da bi mogao biti...

X: ... funkcionalan…

F. Š.: E, to Borges zna raditi. On je od toga na-pravio... eto, to je jedna od mojih vremenskih kapsula... tih stvari koje meni pomažu da se ostvarim. Imam njegovu zbirku poezije, zove se Izabrane pesme, u izdanju Srpske književne za-druge, Beograd, 1982., koju sam izvuk’o iz zgrade Željezničke stanice, dan-dva prije nego što će ona biti zapaljena. Eto… Taj čovjek je tu imao svoju biblioteku Srpske književne zadruge i... ta knjiga mi je bila… kad je ono, nešto teško, onda nju či-tam. Sad sam se ponovo vratio da je čitam. Čitam je dvadeset godina.

F. Š.: Ja sam, u tom smislu science fiction pisac, futurista iako se bavim prošlošću. Razumiješ, taj osjećaj da imaš druge pretke, dolaziš iz drugih krajeva, želiš ići dalje.

Unutar takvog konteksta, revolucionarni zadatak nije pokušaj neposrednog provođenja revolucije — što bi od samog početka bilo osuđeno na neuspjeh — već nastojanje da se ostvare uvjeti u kojima se može provesti stvarna revolucionarna borba. Ovdje se pojavljuje utopija: ne kao apstraktna slika zemlje koja postoji samo u mislima, niti kao najviši stupanj raja u kojem bi sve bilo dobro i dovršeno, već kao telos koji daje smisao svakodnevnim djelatnostima dajući im svrhu.

Paul Piccone, Praxis: filozofski časopis, 1-2, 1972.

65

EPILOG: DOGOVOR ZA (R)EVOLUCIJU

N. Č.: Postavlja se pitanje – a ovo mišljenje nije samo moje, ima još takvih glasova – da li naši napori, i vaši napori, ustvari, doprinose održa-vanju stanja kakvo jeste? Jer, oni mogu biti pre-vara očekivanja, prevara nas i njih koji očekuju promjenu. U sistemu, dobre stvari mogu biti iskorištene ili izmanipulisane od strane vlasti ili privatnika, da nas nekako umire, da se stvari kre-ću... Sad je pitanje: da li da išta radimo, ili – da ne radimo ništa? Da pustimo sistem da se uruši. Inače, ulazim u strašan rizik, da moj pozitivan napor, kakogod, kudgod je okrenut, jednostavno doprinosi da stanje ostane, a ne da se promijeni.

X: Znam, al’ to je rizik, bilo šta...

N. Č.: Nije šta bilo. Ne. (...) Ja ništa ne radim, jer ja kažem: ovakav sistem kakav je – on mora propasti. Jer on ne može proizvesti ništa. Dakle, pitanje je: kad će propasti? Koliko će naš rad, koji nije obavezan, nego je neki dodatni rad, ustvari, produžiti, doprinijeti da se produži sta-nje kakvo jeste. Jer se koristi kao argument da vlast, uprava, neko, ipak brine, planira, razmišlja, uključuje građanstvo, eksperte. To je pitanje.

N. Č.: Ali takva odluka, da nećemo sad ništa raditi – možemo li to dogovoriti? To bi sasvim sigurno bilo destruktivno viđeno, da ti pozivaš ljude da ne rade ništa osim onog što moraju da rade: ići na posao, ići u školu, ići u vrtić, u fabri-ku, u rudnik.

N. Č.: Možda se to pitanje može integrisati u ovome što radite, da se razgoliti to sve. (...) Ja ne govorim o neposluhu nego o održavanju i stvaranju.

X: Ali, ideš protiv sebe...

N. Č.: E, pa ne znam. Dugoročno očekujem da sistem propadne. Dakle, idem u svoju ko-rist. Nemam osnove da ovako govorim, ali razmišljam. Neka linearna promjena ne može napraviti pomak, ovdje može doći samo do revolucije. A, revolucija je jedini instrument

koji može učiniti stvari...

X: Ako se vratimo na alate tako snažne kao rat, onda bi ta revolucija morala biti konstruktivni rat.

N. Č.: Onda bi trebala postojati i odluka o tome. Ne govorim o klasičnoj revoluciji. Govo-rim o novoj revoluciji koja je stvar dogovora, konsenzusa.

X: Kakav oblik bi imala ta revolucija?

N. Č.: E, sad, metode...

X: Anarhističke metode?

N. Č.: Nipošto. Govorimo o nekim cikličnim promjenama. Samo je pitanje kad će doći vrije-me. Kad će doći ta revolucija? (...) Ovo ne smije nipošto da bude poziv na neosmišljeno mijenja-nje. Naprotiv, ovo je jedna racionalna, akadem-ska, stručna, kulturna orijentacija, civilizovana apsolutno u korist svih.

X: Revolucija u smislu radikalne promjene.

N. Č.: Promjene kvalitete... Iz ovoga što sada imamo ne može proizaći novo kvalitetno stanje, bez revolucije. Sad, kakvi su instrumenti? Što je dogovor širi, to su instrumenti jednostavniji. Ako postoje konfliktne strane, onda su instru-menti opasni. I onda nam treba vođa. Inače, ako je stvar dogovora, odluke, htijenja... onda može-mo imati grupu.

Y: Znači, već je internacionalna grupa.

N. Č.: Ona mora biti internacionalna, jer Bosna i Hercegovina je proizvod međunarodnih i lo-kalnih stvari. To je tako.

Uglas: Utopia joint venture.





People adapt to reality, and by adapting, they lose their illusions. Utopia is, therefore, by that adapting, lost in a victorious, airily reality, which doesn’t need any sense of orientation toward the final goal.

Rade Kalanj, Utopian Visions: Phases of Utopian Consciousness, 2004.

69

PREFACE: FUTUREALITY CHECK

X: Shall we sign a utopian charter?

N. Č.: Great man! I used to be a part of The Arc-hitects Association, and my first proposal was to create an urban charter. It was supposed to contain an opinion, a decision on how the city should look like. It was just after the war, but it proved that thin-gs were going, let’s say, in an uncontrolled direction.

N. Č.: (…) I’m talking about a scientific method of planning, which says: there are citizens’ panels, where we speak on the citizens’ level, another thing is an expert team. That’s why I think that fu-ture would have stronger arguments; if there are votes for and against, let’s have the citizens’ opini-on as well. I think it would be great here. Someo-ne would ask What about citizens? So, we haven’t done anything about them. And that is a hole.

X: You are a citizen as well.

N. Č.: I know. But, I’m burdened by my profession.

X: OK, we’ve talked to an X number of people, who are burdened by their professions, or not. Actually, the general conclusion is what you said earlier: your students, Munich 1997…

N. Č.: Yes, they refused to have visions for Sara-jevo, they refused visionary thinking.

X: Refused… because it had to be repaired.

N. Č.: Exactly.

(...)

N. Č.: On the European Union Web page there is a wonderful part about the methods of fore-telling. Foretelling along with gaining knowled-ge; knowing that the vision is certain, close to the future that will be, or that we shall create.

X: What is it, is that a charter? Shall we go for a manifest?

N. Č.: You know what, if we talk about the city… European Urban Charter II, adopted by Europe-an Union in 2008… It is a beautiful document, that everybody will accept, if we want the city to be for all. That means that the current European city is not for all. The content of that document is generally accepted, it is easily acceptable, and it could be your charter. If we accept that charter, if we transcribe it, we shall answer the questions you can ask any person. And every person will accept all of its parts and say: Yes, that’s my future. Thus, it’s a clever, wise, wide document.

N. Č.: It has its genesis. I mean, there are so many documents, coming from Europe. They are made the same way the spatial planning of Europe has been made: based on experiences, practices, achieved and desired goals of all countries, including the Eastern countries. It’s not a recommendation coming from the West, solely. It comes from the West, but it integrates global desires, experiences of some future city. But if you read that decree, it’s horrible to see what all we don’t have.

X: Then it’s a reality check.

N. Č.: Exactly. Bravo!

Z: Futureality Check!

N. Č.: That charter is not utopian, it’s not meant to be. It’s meant to be realistic.

X: And, in fact, it is utopian.

N. Č.: How much does yours differ from that one? Maybe it doesn’t at all.

71

February 2012, Sarajevo. We are starting conver-sations about what Sarajevo’s writers, architects, artists, filmmakers, anthropologists, librarians, activists, cultural workers… – but primarily citizens of Sarajevo – have in mind if asked about their visions for the future of this city. We already envision a possible manifest in front of us. Then, suddenly, a few sentences, from a con-versation transcribed on previous pages, would give an unexpected twist to this story:

N.Č.: That charter is not utopian, it’s not meant to be. It’s meant to be realistic.

X: And, in fact, it is utopian.

Could striving for something that seems like a mere normality become an ideal view on the future of the city and society?

Very normal, very normal or On utopia of urban rights is the Sarajevo edition, fourth in a series of Cities Log investigations, delving into what is at stake in the urban development game and what are the expectations across cities of former Yugoslavia and Albania. This research was triggered, back in 2009, by the citizen’s ac-tions in Zagreb, Pula, Skopje, Belgrade… as well as journalists’ inquiring of the issues of wild ur-banisation and rapid capital investments. These first, uncertain signs of struggle against the disappearance and selling-out of the commons, that at the time seemed more like incidents, have led us to scratch beneath the surface and map out what is it that today shapes the cities in the region. Soon it became clear that the ex-pansion of the real-estate business, the unques-tioned privatisation policies, corruption, shady deal-making and informal investments, are actually a general pattern that indicates a prof-iteering development of (not just) these cities and the undeniable role of the government in these affairs. In a lack of ideas and visions re-garding to what the city as a space of collective action would be, we decided to invoke utopia – a rare remaining, but ignored, even ridiculed tool – as a starting point in pursuit of a more normal future, right here in Sarajevo.

How such a more normal future looks like, then?

About what Sarajevo could become in the future and how it might look, we asked 13 individuals, from whom we expected strong indications, or challenging suggestions if nothing else. Instead, after many hours of lively discussions, we came to realisation that the scope of the utopian pro-jection today resembles what was once consid-ered normal. Normality has become a utopia.

We decided to compare the European Urban Charter 1 & 2, based on a hard-to-object and wonderful idea of a city for everyone and every-day, with the reality of Sarajevo. According to the words of the Council of Europe, these documents, the first one drafted in 1992 and its important revision from 2008, are a ground-breaking step towards European standards, detailing what the urban environment should provide for the Euro-pean citizen. Nothing utopian – but, at first glance, rather an attainable state of utter normality.

However, looking back at the dates of origin of these two very declarations reveals an odd his-torical turnaround. Mainly for Sarajevo, but also worldwide, the years 1992 and 2008 have un-precedentedly disputed the expectations defined by these documents. Who could, just before the siege of Sarajevo in 1992, open an urban charter with the words the town [...] has always been the ideal place in which to gather, somewhere where community and social life is possible, without which, in the words of Thomas Hobbes, life is “nasty, poor, solitary, brutish and short”.

And then, in 2008, it would be the urban devel-opment itself, persistent and unjustified belief in its unstoppable growth, as well as the rise of the urban economy as the only relevant one (based on ephemeral products like knowledge, tourism or urbanity itself), that would on the planetary level bring down that urban dream – through the drain of mortgage and real-estate speculations.

The concluding paragraph from the Charter’s 2008 revision states: It is this optimistic, ambi-tious and demanding message that we wish to

72

convey to our citizens and to all those involved in urban development. We propose this Charter as an invitation to build a new urban project for the towns and cities across Europe based on a sharing of values and an exchange of experience, so that towns and cities can retain their individuality while collectively embodying a European blueprint that is a seamless combination of humanist values, individual freedom, economic prosperity, social solidarity, care for the planet and living culture.

If it was written only a couple of months later, after the global concussion became visible upon the collapse of the Lehmann Brothers (on Sep-tember 15th, 2008, the company filed for bank-ruptcy protection), this Charter would probably have had a less optimistic tone – and its believe in the new urban project would be profoundly challenged and sternly faced with the reality.

Looking at what the European Declaration on Urban Rights, arising from the European Urban Charter proposes, we quote a set of 20 points, dis-tinct rights – such as: security, an unpolluted and healthy enviroment, employment, housing, mobil-ity, health, sport and leisure, culture, multicultural integration, good quality architecture and physical surroundings, harmonisation of functions, partic-ipation, economic development, sustained devel-opment, services and goods, natural wealth and resources, personal fulfillement, inter-municipal collaboration, financial mechanisms and struc-tures, equality – that should be assigned, in fact, guaranteed to the citizens of European cities.

Setting the points of the Declaration in today’s perspective, and confronting them with the viewpoints and opinions of the people we spoke with in Sarajevo, about what the ideal city of the future should be, the normative character of this document quickly becomes subverted. Frag-ments of the conversations about Sarajevo, a city so burdened by the past that it barely conscious-ly lives in the present moment, arranged by the points of the Charter, indicate elusive and utopi-an character of its, actually, very normal stand-ards. The absurdity of the expected rights to the city, what city really ought to be for its citizens,

that these two charters gained immediately after being released, combined with the aspirations of our interviewees in Sarajevo towards devis-ing normalcy, have provided a framework for a search of utopia today. Hence the relevance of the need to achieve normality of the city for citizens, through the (r)evolution of the cities’ potential, ceases to be merely local.

The publication Very Normal, Very Normal leads us through the doubts, dilemmas, flashes of utopia, pessimism, occasional optimism, motiva-tions, and a couple of brilliant ideas about today’s Sarajevo and its possible future. The accompa-nying Pickpad poster takes us to the year 2023. The time in which there is no more transition, a time of retro-utopia and black humour, a time in which things are finally in the hands of citizens.

*

That February 2012, the city became the scene of an unusual spectacle of the forces of nature. While we were talking with people about their utopian visions for Sarajevo, that snow entered the city’s history. They say it is a special kind, fall-ing only in Siberia. It snows even at -15 C. This is not normal. For days, Sarajevo was buried under metres of snow piled up in the streets. The usual everyday errands, like crossing the street or going the groceries shopping, became true adventures. People, under the snow, were asked not to take out their garbage, but to keep it on terraces to avoid further cluttering on the city streets.

After a bit of hesitation, many Sarajevans came to the same conclusion: together, they will need to take things into their own hands, and shovel the snow out of town, to somehow return to the nor-mal. The story of the snow and what the forces of nature can do to an urban environment, a city, is a metaphor of the general state of the society, the moment of snowy idyll, when the individual gets triggered, when the institutional is on hold, and citizens unofficially and collectively form flares of utopian action and solidarity.

Ana Džokić, Asja Hafner and Marc Neelen

73

EMERGENCY AS A WAY OF LIVING

1. SECURITY:to a secure and safe town, free, as far as possible, from crime, delinquency and aggression.

European Declaration on Urban Rights, from European Urban Charter

At the press conference statistical data was

presented to the public on the work of The

Ministry of Internal Affairs of The Canton of

Sarajevo and The Police Administration in

2012. It’s been registered 6.789 criminal of-

fences, which is 306 offences, or 4,3% less

than the previous year. During 2012, 223

criminal charges against life and body were

brought, which is 26 more than in 2011. (...)

The representatives of the authorities empha-

sised the priorities for 2013 – prevention of

organised crime, prevention of illegal drugs

trade, human trafficking, corruption, street

crime, car theft, economic crime, and im-

provement of collaboration with other police

agencies. The conclusion of the conference

is that Sarajevo, in spite of the stated data,

is among the safest cities in Europe, with the

1:100.000 ratio of murders. (...) A public con-

test for 170 policemen has been envisaged,

and by the end of the year there will be anoth-

er one for additional 130. The level of security

will be raised then, as well.

(Source: 24sata.info)

WITHOUT THE STATE AS REFUGE

A. T.: There is no trust in the state as a kind of refuge. It is not the case only here. People create states in order to have something guaranteed. They do it to liberate themselves from their fear of life, of the world, of anything. And here, the

authorities, not only the state, but all the authori-ties, have failed so much, and yet we do not have a strong NGO sector, or any body which could ar-ticulate citizens’ demands. They don’t even know to whom to address their dissatisfaction. Who listens here at all? They are aware that politics is not the art of administrating the society, but the art of coming to power and staying there as long as possible. Everybody has realised that. Well, how different individuals articulate their conscious-ness on that – somebody will swear, somebody will analyse it, but everybody is aware that they cannot count on politics to bring some social pro-gress, not only here, but especially here. Because our state is the executive body of tycoons.

WRONG SPLICING

N. K.: (...) That Skendo, who used to stop people on the streets of Sarajevo. He spoke sentences that were out of context, but perfectly eloquent, mad. He would just stop you on the street and say – I’m afraid that we could go too much into history. Now, I’m also afraid of going too much into history. Historical and political perspectives are inevitable here. (...) I don’t want to diminish human efforts, especially human sacrifice given to the idea of the state, but I’m not sure that we have a state mentality. I have a feeling that we have been given a state, and now we don’t know what to do with it. This is a political story – but it has to do with the spiritual state as well. You know how I test it?

74

What is my argument for such a bold statement? You have here a very consistent absence of a his-torical measurement of time, here you measure the state by the human lifetime – cause, where will I be in ten years, my friend. Ten years is an irrelevant period in terms of history, and what can you say to a 75-year-old, who is on the brink of existence – can you say: don’t worry, you’ll see in ten years? It is hard to create it if it doesn’t exist as a reflex... for future generations. It can’t and it won’t happen during our lifetime.

N. K.: I have a feeling that our political elite is still a heritage of the war and a chaotic state of compromise and improvisation, regardless of the fact that there is no more shooting. As John-ny Štulić would say: Wrong Splicing.

X: Fruits of that wrong planting...

N. K.: That tree is the tree of life, and it is not straight, it is not a common tree, it is not just any tree. It is not a forest. It is a tree, a vital one, and if we reduce it to such a symbolic plane, it has gone in wrong direction. How to straighten it up now, I don’t know. I am only sure this is long lasting, all social changes are long lasting pro-cesses, and that is, often, a cause of human frus-tration. A man is not capable of seeing concrete changes in some faster dynamics, again, from the perspective of a human life. (...) That is why it is honourable to fight for assumptions, for future generations, for people we will never meet, who will, probably, not know anything about us.

UNCERTAIN LIFE, BETTER LIFESTYLE

S. M.: Well, that thing that it was peace then, and there was that myth of the red passport and so on… that is simply idealising the past for the sake of keeping a nice memory, that gives you some assurance. Of course, today when you live from day to day, especially we, who are into cultural projects and so on... At that time, you could make plans, you had contracts for forty years, permanent employment, so you could plan holidays, everybody had some winter stacks and so on. I mean, it was such a habitus;

everybody was buying Dostoyevsky per metre. (…) Simply, the form and the way of life have changed. And, of course, we still live idealising the past. Why? Because it was cosy and warm. Surely. Today, it is not secure, but I think that many people live better lives than they used to.

WHERE DO YOU SEE YOURSELF IN 10 YEARS?

N. J.: Ten years in future? I don’t know what will be in ten months, let alone ten years...

X: I thought that only here we have that, let’s call it a defect – we don’t make plans. Is it due to our experience that you cannot influence anything, or is it a global trend?

N. J.: Listen, I think that our parents didn’t have such a problem. They didn’t have to deal with the future, and maybe that’s a kind of inertia, or leaning on inertia, if we can speak of some sort of mentality, some cognitive maps; that has maybe contributed so that people experienced the end of socialism completely unaware of trauma to follow and what it could have turned into, and what it did turn into, eventually. In that sense, you have some stories on the lack of re-sponsibility. Well, that is not really unfounded.

N. J.: I first heard that Where you see yourself in five or ten years? when I was trying to get a job in a company, that was structured the Western way, let’s say. There you have something called human resources, so when you come to the interview, you have to project yourself into the future. Now we can see how much nonsense that is. What were that question and that answer aiming at? What are they telling us really? Will it happen? That very company, if it exists in the capitalist universe, can go broke tomorrow. We see today, that these things are actually not incidents, but rather a formula. It is obvious that such ques-tions – that imperative to plan our future, to project ourselves in ten years, in this or that position, in this or that category of wages – are plain farce. There is that element of farce, where people convince themselves that things go their natural way, and that it cannot get worse, in any

75

case. While things are actually getting worse, aren’t they? That is obviously a part of the story Where shall we be in ten years. No, thank you.

COMPLICATED AND ENGAGED

X: Can you realise utopia more easily in Scandi-navia, maybe Norway?

A. H.: Life in Norway, in Scandinavia, is general-ly predictable. I mean, that is great, I am secure, I have regular wages, I go on holidays, this and that. All that means a lot, because most of peo-ple here don’t have that. But really, maybe there is a parallel between that kind of society and this kind of society. It creates a certain paralysis, making you wait for something. There is no mo-tive, really. It is hard to find a motive in Norway to become engaged in something, I don’t know what it could be. We like to complicate our lives in this or that way. If we don’t choose to com-plicate our life, it will get complicated by itself through some other stupid, less worthy things. Therefore, me coming back here is an attempt to consciously choose something which makes life more interesting.

X: More complicated or more interesting?

A. H.: I think that those two complement each other.

LEVEL OF UTOPIA IN BLOOD

N. K.: Listen, if we talk about individual utopias – I think we talk about those mostly – then,

there are different levels of human motivations, because we are all so different as individuals, that different people have different perspectives regarding the same things. (…) And even if we believe in a better future this is at a certain level, like the level of cholesterol in blood. You have a normal level with which you live, your normal physiological condition, as you have a certain level of believing in a better future, which some-how exists in you, as an adopted utopian vision.

X: And, what does it mean, believing in utopia?

N. K.: I think that believing in utopia, by itself, as a semantic construction, is problematic, it means believing the impossible. I wouldn’t go into those esoteric spheres now. Let’s go back to real life. Concretely, if we want to open our win-dow and see how life looks like, and how people look like, you see existential problems imposing themselves (…) And still, people have no work and they pray to God not to find it. They wait for a situation where they can fit in. Well now… that’s a sphere of illusions… let me daydream, and if I daydream and that is not grounded, should I keep on dreaming? It is a closed circle, where you are chasing your own tail and keep on saying I have a chance, maybe one day...

N. K.: We shouldn’t forget one thing: we live in a system, which has numbed many of us. Czesław Miłosz would say that you can inherit things through the experience of people close to you, even if you haven’t experienced them yourself. The good ones, and the bad ones. (...) There is a whole tradition of denial here, regarding the mentality, with many variations. And that is partially a cause or a consequence of utopia. Probably both.

X: And what about a Bosnian dream?

N. K.: Well, of course it exists. I live such a dream. I’m not saying I’m so different, but I’m trying to find, catch some things I’d like to do. I think it is a huge realisation of human expe-rience that life cannot be the way it cannot be – but similar to that.

76

CONTAMINATION OF (HUMAN) NATURE

2. AN UNPOLLUTED AND HEALTHY ENVIROMENT: to an environment free from air, noise, water and ground pollution and protective of nature and nature resources.


The World Health Organisation had declared

Sarajevo as the most polluted city in Europe

in 2011, and the British newspaper Guardian

states that Sarajevo was the most polluted

in 2012, as well. However, The Institute of

Public Healthcare from Sarajevo states that

this isn’t true, because the yearly average for

2012, according to the measuring units of The

Institute, was “between 84 and 87 µg of dust

particles per cubic metre.” „During the same

period Athens had an average pollution at a

level of 98 µg/m3”. (...) Martin Tais, an expert

for air quality and climate changes, states

that Sarajevo is “a black hole on the Europe-

an map of the most polluted cities.” During

wintertime, the concentration of poisonous

particles in the air oftentimes reaches alarm-

ing values, and then the health of the citizens

is mostly jeopardised. (…) Deutsche Welle

warns that the problems won’t disappear –

the population of Sarajevo becomes poorer,

thus, as they don’t have enough money for

quality fuel, they burn whatever they can in

their stoves. But, wood is so expensive, and

the winter is so cold. That’s why you throw

whatever you can in your stove. (…) Sarajevo

is like a pot during the winter, where, during

the temperature inversions a concentration of

PM10 particles appears – Martin Tais says. (…)

Cars can seriously pollute the environment.

EU has obligated the cities, which have big

amounts of floating particles, to reduce the

pollution. That has been done in a way that

eco-zones have been formed in those cities,

where no cars are allowed.

(Source: Avaz.ba)

77

TREBEVIĆ TO THE SEA

S. R.: I have a huge wish, a great utopia – but I know that there is no financial possibility for that – to push Trebević mountain to the sea. I would have waves on Miljacka River and a Med-iterranean climate.

X: Aha, that... Trebević into the sea...

S. R.: Push it to the sea.

FOREST IN THE CENTER OF THE CITY

Z. Ć.: And then, you start travelling after the war, and you see that every city has a big park. Barcelona for example... It has Citadel Park, with a lake in the middle of it, and you see peo-ple rowing, lying on the grass… reading books, having lunch, going there for a break… during the weekends it is full – it’s beautiful! And then I thought: what to do in Sarajevo, where parks were destroyed and in fact we haven’t ever had any real parks? As we have no more Trebev-ić Mountain as a resort, the source of Bosna River is at the other end of the city, where can we make a park? And then, sometime in the 2000’s, when it was all still very much ruined... I thought it could be all the way from Skenderija, over Valter Perić, which is still ruined, over the old tobacco factory, then Vilson’s Promenade, all the way to the hotel Bristol. I would leave the Museum, the Parliament building, the faculty... all the rest should be removed, the asphalt tak-en away and a deep forest should be planted. In that vision, I would also use Miljacka River, although it is not a serious river, and all serious cities have serious rivers. Or, if we can’t use it, let’s clean it up at least, and build a promenade on its bank.

X: You stroll on it?

Z. Ć.: That’s right. All the way to Vijećnica. So that you walk by the river, go by the trams, not on stupid sidewalks, but by the river – by Mil-jacka. (...) And on certain locations you have stairs to go up, where you have some benches, flowers, everything... You have a big park, a big

forest, and this promenade where we can stroll, run, ride bikes, enjoy, walk our dogs... That is my vision, where I am the absolute ruler of Sarajevo, and I decide on everything. (…) That was my first vision, until we reconstruct the cable car to Trebević, to be able to take our kids there, as my parents used to take me. I was always fascinated by the cable car and I still try to explain that to my kid... but you can’t explain it, although I tried with the Internet and all that...

STUDYING UNDER TREE

Z. Ć.: Well now, that is the vision, now I’ve min-imised it and I’m trying to create a miniature. But, that is a real utopia.

Z. Ć.: All that space behind Access we cultivate… We plant some plants, we add trees to the ex-isting forest, and then you create space for a big park, which is in order... all that in our student campus, where we have 5.000 students. And then a student comes there, he goes to the park, sits there, between two trees, lie down, read, study...

Z. Ć.: I’m trying to change consciousness through all of that, to create our small space at the Centre For Cultural and Media Decontam-ination, where there is no fashion, no betting, a music... no hits and all that. And we have an event called Tea Party With Mad Hatter, and we’ve already had a popular band Billy Andol playing a few times...

Z. Ć.: I’m telling you I have a billion of such ideas, but I don’t see them as utopias. Those are some things I’m interested in and that could happen...

MENTALITY DROWNED IN MILJACKA

N. K.: Public space corresponds, naturally, with mentality. To me, one of the greatest metaphors of the city of Sarajevo is the river Miljacka. You don’t need a shopping mall. You don’t need a glass tower to explain – even without those you have a great symbol of mentality and society. It is the river, which could be anything but the

78

river. I mean, how polluted it is, how everything around it looks... It is all just patched up so people can cross the bridges, and then they put some lighting here and there... Some individual efforts are not neglectful, but the river itself speaks that we don’t mind that – I know, I live here – it stinks during the summer.

N. K.: Since I am a fisherman, I’d like to stand on a bridge over Miljacka and see some trout. I’d like that, you know. It is my subjective utopia. Just let me see that, it doesn’t have to be some kitsch with flowers and all, it is stupid. Just the way it is, only clean and full of fish.

X: Which breed would you fish here?

N. K.: You have those that can live in polluted waters as well. I think they’re called mrenić, it’s small fish with moustache. I think they are related to catfish, I’m not sure. But trout could not survive, cause it has very low tolerance to pollution.

Y: How far from the city you have to go to...

N. K.: Very near. Just three kilometres…

Y: It doesn’t seem to be a big problem then?

N. K.: It is a huge one! Somebody has done an ecological study recently – how much money we would need to move all the toxic waste and

sewage waters, which go into Miljacka. Eighty Million Euros. It is a lot of money. But that would be a long-term project for the city. There is a study, I’ve seen it on some Internet portals, somebody thinks about it, so I’m thinking, may-be one day. (…) If we gave it to the Japanese, they would figure it out.

X: And then we’d have gold fish...

N. K.: No, not gold, but some normal fish, nothing exotic. You know that joke when Mujo caught the gold fish in Miljacka? She told him: I’ll grant you three wishes, just don’t put me back there.

SORTED GARBAGE

F. Š.: Well, my utopia is somehow brought to life in infrastructure... You bring garbage... plastic separately… glass separately... Now we have everything together. There is no differentiation. (...) This garbage or that garbage... no, we don’t have that... Utopia would be...

X: ... to have recycling. It is a good metaphor, that even garbage is mixed here…

79

FORCED REDUNDANCY

3. EMPLOYMENT: to adequate employment possibilities; to a share in economic development and the achievement thereby of personal financial autonomy.


Employed – Unemployed in B&H

Employed

2012 437.331

02-2013 433.439

03-2013 432.853

Unemployed

2012 377.707

02-2013 386.432

03-2013 386.091

(Source: The Federation of Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Federal Institute of Statistics)

HALF OF THE WORLD DOESN’T KNOW WHAT TO DO TOMORROW

S. R.: 1968 wasn’t in vain. It was a spontaneous year. The students went to demonstrate because they wanted changes. How many young people in the world you have today, that don’t know what they will do tomorrow. Those are not small percentages, like three, five, or ten. 50% of the world’s population doesn’t know what they will do tomorrow. And they have no security.

S. R.: We can talk about what comes first – a desire or a need? Does a need create desire or does a desire create need? That is the subject on which you build utopia. For me, utopia is a desire, not a need. Because, I’ve created some mini desire of mine... I have a utopia, that I’m satisfied. But, if there is no need for utopia, then people don’t have that desire.

(...)

S. R.: If I compare it to the time when I was studying, I can say that we were going for-ward, and then we turned back suddenly, now we go forward, but looking backward, and in order to have a utopia you need to walk sideways, at least.

80

EXISTENTIAL MINIMUM

A. H.: In these surroundings a person quickly becomes an elitist. At a point when we can’t find an interest in uneducated and uninterested ones, we are making a mistake, in a way. At the end of the day, I think that the most valuable thing for this society would be if people had jobs. 70% or 80% of people need that stability in order to have some additional energy, which could be used for something else. Now, all the energy is used for survival. And that reduces the human mind to some primary brain activities.

X: There is a huge part of the population, for in-stance, employed in state institutions. You don’t have to work there, but still you have a salary. They even expect you not to work. What is that?

A. H.: What is that? In Norway – let’s get back to that parallel – it is the same. But, they have enough money to support that, and we don’t. If somebody is happy to work from eight to two, and then go home and watch TV, I think, they should have that right. They do jobs you and me don’t want, they move papers around, put stamps, write… I want to say that we have dif-ferent needs and we define happiness in differ-ent ways. So, masochism is need for some, and somebody else understands everyday life: TV series at four, TV series at seven, TV series at nine. I think that such people should have their place in the world, because they are the majority.

A. H.: So, we need to establish an economic framework, where a minimum of those needs can be met. Maybe that is a utopia as well.

Y: ... that is close to the socialism we used to have.

A. H.: Yes, but it is obvious, that it was based on borrowed money.

NEWSSTAND WITH A SEA VIEW

Z. Ć.: So, I gave everybody ten years… I’ll be 53 then, my wife will be 53, and my kid will be 18. I think that would be the right time... And then

I’ll go and find a job in a newsstand with a sea view. I’ll work there, and the rest of the time I’ll carry a video camera and shoot around. There-fore, I’m looking for a job in a newsstand with a sea view. That is my first utopia.

81

DWELLING IN RETREAT4. HOUSING: to an adequate supply and choice of affordable, salubrious housing, guaranteeing privacy and tranquillity.


(…) Prices of real estate in the previous pe-

riod had been under the influence of global

economic movements, as well as too big,

uncontrolled building of flats, which led to

oversaturation. It is hard to give a precise

answer to prediction of the prices of real es-

tate in the next year, because the real estate

market in Bosnia is not managed, it doesn’t

have enough precise statistical data, which

could give us exact information on the prices,

as it is the case in European countries. (…)

(Source: Sparkassenekretnine.ba)

INITIATIVE IS IN THE RESTING ROOM

S. Ć.: ... And then this Astra club appeared by my apartment building. We learned that they were building a casino with, as it was registered, resting rooms on the upper floor. That caused a huge, impulsive rage inside me. Then I asked around about the laws regarding the vicinity of casinos and schools, since there is an elementary school just behind that building. How far a casino should from an educational institution, a religious build-ing or a cultural institution… etc. I remember from school that that part of the city was the most

82

densely populated… In fact, it all started very naive, I made a pamphlet, which was tendentious and half-primitive, because I was addressing people who should be annoyed by that pamphlet, saying: Do you want to live near “resting rooms” and a casino? It was all systematically removed the next morning. If we were just that efficient in everything we’d be like Finland, because abso-lutely all of the pamphlets were removed – from building entrances, from cars... I was even more enraged, naturally. At that point I went to The Municipal Assembly, and then some uncomfort-able things started happening. The Municipality Mayor reacted, the Internet portal Radio Sarajevo reacted, Sarajevo-X reacted... The positive side of that story is that it is so easy to get so much media covering with any initiative in Sarajevo – because there are no initiatives, which also initiated me to deal with all that even more actively.

MINI-MIDI-MAXI COMMUNITIES

S. A.: These cities have to be given up, because it has become senseless. You can’t create any utopia in a thirty-million conglomerate. It can be created only locally, micro-locally – that is happening.

S. A.: Urbanism has generally become a utopia. In short, utopia is a dream... And, it is better to dream of something which many people already live. (…) You know, there are none in Bosnia, I haven’t heard of any in Serbia, but Zagreb, Croats… They have many self-sustainable, isolated communes of different types. Those people already live utopia.

S. A.: During the ‘80es I was proposing such communes, with only public transport, no pri-vate... only trains or...

Y: I’d like to know how could living as a group, a community, maybe a commune… be achieved – something more then an individual living in ones home?

S. A.: When several intimate communities join into a midi community, and then maybe into a maxi one.

S. A.: I’m here to defend my already defined attitude on future. I’m convinced that in fu-ture people will inevitably have to turn toward self-sustainable communities. Because the infrastructure will crack, in technological and physical sense. You can’t have 30 million people living together, it absolutely has to crack some-where. That is why the future of city is that it has to become a polis within polis.

X: ... in fact, neighbourhoods, quarters, mahala...

S. A.: Can we chat?

X: Of course.

S. A.: The most beautiful little detail I saw these days, when it was snowing here in Sarajevo, was in Ali-Pašino Polje quarter. It was on TV, people were removing snow, women were bringing some tea, coffee, etc. It was phenom-enal – and there was a musician living on the eighth floor, who was sick. Then a guy with a shovel, when he got tired, shouted: Mujo! Play us a song. Then Mujo came to the window with his clarinet and played them some music. They said Thanks Mujo! …and continued shovelling. In the sense of a micro-neighbourhood that is possible. But on bigger levels, quarters, I think it is impossible, whether it is in Sarajevo, Prishtina, or Belgrade.

NEXT FUTURE

S. A.: Really, I think that we have to run away, and let those stay here.

S. A.: Have you ever gone there beyond Butile? You go along a swamp, and then some nice hills appear. That for instance is not populated a lot. It is near, there is a good connection. If I started an experiment of creating a commune in Sara-jevo, I’d do it on those hills after Butile. You can see entire Sarajevo, but it is nice, the meadow is well preserved.

X: So we have only commune left as a utopia.

83

S. A.: That is my standpoint. That is my attitude, if you understand me.

Y: And why haven’t you created such a commune?

S. A.: A long time ago, but in a very prosaic way, before the war, during the eighties. We all sat down, we had already been couples, we had kids and this and that… So, many people were buying land in Pale, and a few of my friends had already bought some, some had land on the seaside, here and there… And, then a wealthy peasant came, he had a lot of land, and he was trying to convince us all to go there and live to-gether. But, it wasn’t supposed to be a commune. Anyway, I’ve never really tried it.

X: Such a commune would make more sense now in an alternative educational sense.

Z: (...) Austria is full of such initiatives, baugru-pen... It’s not a utopia, but it is perhaps utopian. There are some in France as well. There is a tra-dition of such groups... it is not uncommon, but I think it is opposed to social trends.

S. A.: We can already see that in the next future explosion of population and expansion of new technologies will stop development of cities, as we know it. (…) In the future they will not be possible. (…) That makes these ideas utopian.

84

LIMITED FLOW5. MOBILITY: to unhampered mobility and freedom to travel; to a harmonious balance between all street users – public transport, the private car, the pedestrians and cyclists.


(…) Six member countries of the EU asked

in October 2012, that in the case of abuse,

the states of The West Balkans get excluded

from the no-visa regime, which implies the

freedom of traveling to the Schengen zone

countries. Representatives of The European

Council, European Commission and European

Parliament have not been able to reach an

agreement on the mechanism for suspension

of the no-visa regime for the countries of The

West Balkans. (…)

(Source: Source.ba)

(…) Specificity which will occur when Croatia

enters the EU is that a part of the B&H citizens

will have passports, with which they will be

able to move freely on the territory of the EU

and have better access to educational insti-

tutions, for example, while for the rest of the

B&H citizens the movement and the approach

will be more difficult. That creates a further

division inside the B&H citizens, and in this

case we should be cautious that having the

EU passport doesn’t create new elites among

of our citizens. (…)

(Source: Radiosarajevo.ba)

STATION WITH NO TRAINS

X: The example of our Railway Station alone gives us a good impression of the state of the infrastructure.

F. Š.: It looks monumental, it is actually a mon-ument, and it is dysfunctional, I mean, there are no trains.

X: It is also important architecturally, and the ar-chitect is important as well, it even has the biggest vault in the Balkans, or in the former Yugoslavia.

F. Š.: Wasn’t there an electronic music festival?

X: That was after the war.

F. Š.: During those golden post-war years?

X: Golden post-war years, yes, but during the war refugees were placed there.

F. Š.: Inside the Station building?

X: Yes, inside. Even after that there were homeless who lived inside the wagons and inside the building.

STATIC EVEN WITHOUT VISAS

S. M.: We now talk about this termination of the visa regime so much, that it has become absurd. Do we travel like crazy? No, we don’t. Simply, a guy from Vareš has stayed there to take care of the spinach he planted. Listen to this, I’m not going to Berlin to see Berlinale... I’m not going, simply not going. Now, it looks like we all would like to go to Berlinale, then to the Fashion Week in Paris, then to the Louvre, and then rehearse... on Fridays and Saturdays.

MY MICRO-ENVIRONMENTS

S. M.: I think the way we perceive reality is a bit distorted. I mean, we all live in micro-spheres.

85

You know, I live in my flat in Dolac Malta – that is a micro-sphere, my neighbourhood, where I have a coffee with my neighbours, a brandy on Sunday evening… Then I have my work, and then after work we go to the Tito bar for a beer, that is my second micro-sphere… Sometimes on Saturdays we hang out in Babylon – which is my third micro-sphere. And I simply don’t know of any other environments, you know... Like a restaurant in Ilidža, where people sit until the morning with those half-naked singers. I would never go there. That is farther than Ar-gentina to me. In fact, I might go to Argentina, but there I’ll never go.

SUBWAY - SCIENCE FICTION

F. Š.: A pensioner, let’s call him Ramo, Ramović. He was really bothered with the problem of the city transport. Then he invented little helipads. He’s got a whole theory on where those helipads would be located, how to transport people... That is his futuristic vision.

X: He’s made a book about it?

F. Š.: Yes, he described it all there. And he print-ed it by himself, there is a foreword as well, written by himself, of course. Everything is by himself.

F. Š.: Now, if I would have those literal visions. I like the subway in Vienna... You don’t feel time, there is no sense of space and time. You go fast... you pass through the space very quickly. You meet someone in five minutes, who’s on the oth-er end of Vienna. That is impossible in Sarajevo. There is no space, it’s too small. Someone would say: why do you need a subway, there would be four or five stops to Ilidža. (...) Subway would be science fiction here.

WITHOUT CAR DOMINATION

N. N. Č.: During those first two days of the emergency due to heavy snow the town was very much alive. And the air was so clean... For years they’ve been telling us that we are

the most polluted city because of wood heat-ing in houses. On that day people were most certainly heating a lot, but there were no cars on the streets...

N. N. Č.: My idea was to have the city centre with no cars, with stronger public space. No public space for shopping. (Of course, then we would need a lot of garages outside of it and a very reliable and quick public transport, which we don’t have now.) Then, we should have a good, functional railway station, and the bus station – where we would have practically all what we have now, but not like this, that, when I need something, I almost enter a shop with my car. I think that such a concept would cause drastic changes in relations among people. Al-though I don’t speak about this primarily from an ecological point of view, we could approach it from that side too. (…) I’m not against cars per se, but I think that the overuse of cars is, to my opinion, a demonstration of power and an unnecessary commodity on many occasions.

N. N. Č.: This could mean the beginning of a biking culture here, as well. And it would be nice that there are stairs or escalators on each steep hill in town, for instance on a distance of each kilometre… Like the stairs in Herceg-Novi...

Y: In Medellin, Colombia, they’ve made a cable car and escalators, like public transport, to those inaccessible hills – exactly what you are saying!

86

DIAGNOSTICS OF WELLBEING

6. HEALTH: to an environment and a range of facilities conductive to physical and psychological health.


It is certain that specific conditions under

which the citizens of Sarajevo lived during

the war (1992 – 1995) have health, sociolog-

ical, spiritual and religious, material and po-

litical long-term implications for the lives of

each individual in our country. The research

project regarding the level of symptoms of

PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) with

the citizens of the Canton of Sarajevo, was

one of the important activities from The Ac-

tion Plan for the programme of following,

prevention and treatment of demobilised

defenders and members of their families

in the Canton of Sarajevo for the period of

2008-2012. (…) A qualitative analysis of the

replies, categorised in fourteen categories,

it was noticed that the most common trau-

matic events in each age group were loss or

injury of a close person, deprivation of basic

human needs and the war zone. Within the

examined sample, 18.6% of the examined

showed strong symptoms of PTSD, 63.6%

showed mild symptoms, and 18% of the ex-

amined showed no symptoms. Women had

more symptoms connected to intrusion,

while men had more symptoms connected

to avoiding situations that remind them on,

or are connected to the traumatic event. The

multiple character of traumatic events, and

an unusually high number of citizens of Sa-

rajevo (82%), which had some symptoms re-

lated to stress, confirm the destructiveness,

brutality and how atypical that war was, and

its inconceivable consequences for all na-

tions living in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

(Source: Ministry of Health of the Canton of Sarajevo)

87

MENTAL SPA

S. A.: I have an earlier work titled Tower For Al-ternative Prevention of Mental Health. I consult-ed psychologists, psychiatrists, as well. As you climb up the tower, it relieves your stress and shock in different ways, known and new. The climbing starts easy, then it sharpens. And when you come up on the top, you can scream.

X: So, that’s what we need, to cure trauma?

Y: And, how it could function today?

S. A.: Today... much easier than back then.

WAR FILM IN HEADS

N. K.: I think that in this country, the main sub-ject, the subject of war, is approached in a wrong way. It is being manipulated, human losses are being manipulated with, long lasting pain is being manipulated with, without even laying down all the facts.

X: Was the war, then, a utopia, so we already had our utopia?

N. K.: Among other perspectives, there is also that one, that it was utopian...

N. K.: But, when do you know that trauma is digging around human soul? When people ask you – what kind of film are you making? Then you say, it’s about war – oh, please, not war films anymore, there are so many of those. It’s not be-cause there are too many war films, but because the war film is in people’s heads, and those films have never been downloaded from their heads. I don’t mean films in cinematographic way, but stories, their anguish, what they’ve been through. That has never been pulled out of them in an adequate way, it has rather been manipulated with in mass burials... Just to keep the fire burning, to maintain the temperature of nationalism.

CAPSULE FOR SELF-ASSEMBLY

X: Are we under siege still? Do we need a utopia to liberate ourselves from it? Why don’t you want to think about future, is that so horrible?

F. Š.: Those are tough questions... I don’t know, I should now... go into fiction.... When I write a book... that character... you have to invent it. For instance, his principal obsession is that somebody close to him was killed, and he deals with losses and that space... Many people have that problem, that’s why I find it important. So, he’s overcome his trauma somehow. He’s real-ised something... OK. But, when he reached that point, he realised, OK, what now? If there hadn’t been a war he would have had some other big trauma. Maybe the trauma of transition from socialism into some kind of wild capitalism. He would have had something, anyway.

F. Š.: And then, the character says that he thinks that all people should write books, not only writers. It doesn’t have to be a book; those are metaphors, of course. It can be a drawing... any-thing, an interview... A huge book with healing powers, which would connect fragments of your life, which would reassemble people. That book is not physical...

X: So, we need then...

F. Š.: A time capsule... like Dr Who, you click... and travel, go back and you realise... You get to understand that you are the way you are. (…) I don’t know, it’s about that to me. I was suffering all the time: how come, my house from before the war... my flat. I’ve reconstructed everything... that character started reconstructing me. Then he says: when he enters the flat, there are fangs of a boar killed by his father in the year when he was born, there is the bathroom, there... tiles, it’s always cold in the bathroom… it’s window looks at some garden behind, there is the bedroom, here is the TV, there you have tapes, books, here is a table, some letters, erotic magazines... some closets... I need a hundred thousand words just to describe the room. OK, that’s Proust, In Search of Lost Time.

88

X: Is that, the past, that resetting, that we all talk about, typical of Sarajevo? Or Bosnian experience?

F. Š.: It’s typical for Croatia and Serbia, too.... everywhere... hat is a crack in the system. But, I don’t think it is directly connected to the war.

F. Š.: You know why I think it is important... That fictional character... he has projections of future, he deals with this only in his small town... In one of his dreams he walks with his sister and it’s snowing. Then, a tram appears, and that’s the desire to make something look more beautiful than it really is – because that town is ruined. So, he walks, and it’s nice, great, you know. That river there is beautiful, but it’s not navigable. Now, he says it would be great if the river was navigable, then the town would open up... to thousands of cosmopoli-tan possibilities. The river would bring ships, sailors, and so on. It is literally a utopia. But, then he says, as he dives in, wherever he goes, when he has images of the future, he always comes back to the past. Because he simply has to construct.

F. Š.: So, I’d make a cabin, or a box... it would be pure science fiction. There I’d have 3D holo-grams, where everybody would face their prob-lems. It doesn’t have to be past. (...) Something like Minority Report with its stories. So, you’re touching... You should have told me five days earlier to prepare myself. I could have described it: you come, you enter, you ring....

F. Š.: In fact, I’d make a utopia where people would have to go back into the past all the time. Their utopia would be to reconcile... That is my obses-sion. Let’s say Busovača, a small town... an hour drive from here... It is a divided town, not literally. For those small towns I’d make little capsules for people, but their future will be past, all the time.

F. Š.: That’s nothing bad. It won’t last long... limit-ed... Listen, those common people... I’m not inside their heads... But I know them from before the war, I used to hang out with them... They don’t have visions, man... like some... Not all people are the same. His vision was to have clean socks during the war, that he can eat. He thinks, he has emotions, he has a lot of things... but, those are all minimal demands. Man, those common people, they don’t need much to go back, to solve it. I don’t know... they say... we killed these here, and they killed those there. Now, if made all that like a hologram... then you say: see this... there is BBC footage. He says, OK, I believe you, I was there, I had to, but I didn’t shoot. The other one says: I did. And then you have some confrontation.

X: In England, on one of the channels we can watch, there is a great TV show called The Worst Jobs In History. There was an episode about a job from medieval times, called sin eater. That person, obviously an outcast, had to eat a piece of bread and salt from a dead body, left there for one night. That way the sin eater would take over all the sins from the dead person and liber-ate him/her that way. Thus, those pieces of bread could not be thrown away, somebody had to eat them, process them. That capsule is, in fact, a modern sin eater.

F. Š.: Yes, an eater. But, it has to be interactive, I don’t know if Dr Who, the time lord, could help...

Y: But, what’s happening with a society where people have used the capsule? What does the society become after that?

F. Š.: That capsule, it already exists, of course... but it will take a lot of time, man. The capsule is huge, stretched in time.

89

PARALYMPICS OF LEISURE

7. SPORT AND LEISURE: to access for all persons, irrespective of age, ability or income, to a wide range of sport and leisure facilities.


(…) Each time somebody mentions mines I re-

member the fact that the aggression from the

neighbouring Serbia, beside the lives of many

innocent people and destroyed towns, also

stole from us many natural beauties, Trebević

Mountain among them. The dear, shaky, scary

Trebević cable car was destroyed too, and the

favourite picnic spot for the Sarajevans was

covered with mines. There is no more that

childish excitement, while we are climbing

up the stairs from the Brewery toward the

plateau, where we hear the rumbling of big

wheels and red and blue cars, swinging as

they approach the platform. There is no more

excitement as we are waiting for our turn to

get into that pretty box, to be scared until we

get out… No more counting the posts… No

more that sweet unsettledness when the ca-

ble car suddenly stops on the highest spot…

No more those scary signs on a mysterious

box in the case of emergency, where it said:

attention, achtung… No more parents com-

forting their scared children, and then lighting

cigarettes as they get out… No more murmurs

at Vidikovac, no more Prvi Šumar, sleigh track

in Bruse, Botanical Garden, walking to the

top, smile of a hiker, children’s laughter… No

more that beautiful view from the Trebević

cable car, nor the joy of coming back to Sara-

jevo. As if the very remembrance of Trebević

is covered with mines. Really, without Trebev-

ić and that cable car, Sarajevo’s Saturdays

and Sundays have lost their most wonderful

meanings. New generations don’t know what

has been stolen from them, and we can only

sigh – like we did, when the cable would stop

at its highest point… Those were some of the

posts just before the top… Even if that had

been the only consequence of the aggression

it would have been too much. The only thing

that comforts me is the feeling when the cable

car starts running again. I’m imagining that.

What a joy! Insh Allah!

(Remembrances: Memory of Trebević –

covered with mines! Blob.blogger.ba)

90

TAKE THE PARK INTO YOUR OWN HANDS

S. Ć.: There is a great park, and a man guards it with a rifle. It is really, without any cynicism, probably the best thing that’s ever happened to the Hrasno quarter. There are four high-rises, and generally, that quarter is not famous for its parks. In front of one of those high-rises there used to be, let’s call it, a grassy surface, but it was more a pile of sand, with an old truck standing in front of it. The man took care of that place. He is an ex-soldier, and now he’s a stay at home dad, who has one or two kids, while his wife studies something, or works. And he did a miracle. He even exaggerated. I think that when those trees grow, there will be a jungle, it will not be possible to pass there. He made a gazebo and some amazing shade, all by himself.

S. Ć.: It is interesting that he very aggressively defends the park. I’ve thought about it, but great, he’s obviously occupied public space, not just that, he’s arranged it by his own standards and taste. People recognised him and even give him donations now. He was even called by the offi-cials of the municipality to arrange other parks. (…) You know, I wouldn’t put that Snow White if I was arranging it, but I didn’t do it, so he has all the rights to put a twelve-meter Snow White if he wants to.

(...)

S. Ć.: In fact, this is maybe not the model we would want. (…) Everybody talks about the lack of law in this country... many times I hear that in cabs: this is because we don’t have a state.

91

UNATTENDED CULTIVATION

8. CULTURE: to access to and participation in a wide range of cultural and creative activities and pursuits.


Due to unsolved legal status and problems

with financing “seven cultural institutions

of the State importance” is on the verge of

closing down. The National Museum of Bos-

nia And Herzegovina, Historical Museum of

Bosnia And Herzegovina, National And Uni-

versity Library of Bosnia And Herzegovina,

Museum of Literature And Theatrical Art

of Bosnia And Herzegovina, Art Gallery of

Bosnia And Herzegovina, Library For Blind

and Visually Impaired Persons of Bosnia And

Herzegovina and The Cinetheque of Bosnia

And Herzegovina are closing for the public

and will continue to work in cold offices and

depots, while the employees’ wages are late

a year or even more. The reason for that is in

the fact that none of the authorities, on any

level have expressed their opinion on these

institutions, although the Dayton Agreement

(1995) envisaged that. The politician, who is

the most responsible at the end of the day, for

these seven institutions, Sredoje Nović (from

SNSD party), The Minister of Civil Affairs in his

second mandate, commented on the whole

situation: “If somebody thinks that B&H is

just Sarajevo, or that only one institution is

important for B&H, they are wrong. Because,

we can say then that people in Sarajevo or in

Banja Luka are more important than those

in Mostar or Doboj, and I think this is a com-

pletely wrong approach.”


92

DEAD-END

A. T.: You have institutions like The National Museum, which will always exist, but you have the problem of its maintenance, and the bad administration. Many people don’t even know what they are here for – especially The History Museum, Olympic Museum, or The Museum of Literature and Theatre Art. There are almost no visitors, and their presentation is weak. Also, they are nobody’s priority, but those institutions were established by the state. The state is even not a priority to itself. It’s something that doesn’t have the strength either to stand or fall, a zom-bie, so everything established by it starts looking like that.

A. T.: (...) If we are talking about utopia, then we can talk about some very enthusiastic in-dividuals, like restaurateurs of art pieces, who were restoring in the Art Gallery for free… Or the paradox – in 1909 Bosnia And Herzegovina was literally shredded into pieces after the an-nexation, but the work of The National Museum was never questioned, nobody said: aha, there is nothing Bosnian there, The Museum represents Serb, or Croat culture. The whole country was being dissolved, but The National Museum still worked. So, today we find ourselves in a worse situation, that this institution is questioned, be-cause it, seemingly, does not represent adequate-ly all nations. (…) We have that problem that this is the state of nations, not of citizens... We have an inner division of the state, and when that happens the next step is to create a national state, which is impossible, so we find ourselves at a dead-end.

REMEMBRANCE AND OBLIVION

N. N. Č.: I’ve thought about why don’t they open a The National Museum on the other side as well...

X: ... from the garden...

N. N. Č.: There has been a concept of museum reforms in other countries for a long time al-ready, in order to have proper relationship with

that. I mean, at this moment, the whole situation with museums, not to mention what culture represents on the state level, is a kind of crisis of remembrance. They say that remembrance consists of remembering and oblivion, so that oblivion is a part of remembrance.

CAN I ENTER HERE?

S. Ć.: We have a problem with authority. Even when I pass by The National Museum or The Museum of Revolution, and such institutions, I wonder – Can I enter here? Am I allowed to enter? Is it open? Will somebody ask me some-thing? I feel some unfounded awe toward that space, while I never feel that abroad. So, it’s not about me and museums, or public space, but it is about their attitude... The feeling of freedom, that you feel like an equal user, is the manage-ment’s issue, this is a matter of management, the atmosphere you create in an institution, that would let people really occupy public space. Then I thought about The New York Public Library, where people regularly come to have lunch, to eat their sandwiches.

SYNTHETIC CLAY

X: Your utopia reduces, in fact, to the relation-ship between people.

Z: What change do we need... in order for utopia to become reality?

S. M.: I think it is being blocked by the educa-tion system, by the curriculum... I work at the University, and I think we are the least impor-tant link, because I have grown-ups, already literate people coming to me. When you get an amorphous mass, that synthetic clay, that yet needs to be modelled… then as the time passes, through the education system… we get marble. Simply, it is hard to model marble. It means, while you still have clay, you don’t do anything with it. You model it a bit, just to fit a matrix, like Kentucky Fried Chicken, all same chicken legs. Then you put it in the oven and roast it.

93

S. M.: I’d like to be dough until the end of my life – meaning nothing should be fixed. Each statement can be questioned, even this one. Therefore, we are not used to doubt, we at the university don’t have developed critical thought.

S. M.: Schools shouldn’t be temples of knowl-edge. They have to be agorae. When we realise that the educational system is an agora, not a temple, then the whole concept of thinking will change and we’ll be ready for dialogue. Until then we will remain slaves to the system.

S. M.: There, we’ve recently had a great project called The School I Love and we announced a public contest for school professors, teachers on what different methods they would use with children, without a budget of 43 zillion KM. Simply, what is your method? My favourite was the Mixed secondary school from Kalesija... The kids realised that there was a meadow behind the school, they ploughed it, planted lots of stuff. Well, that’s already an interaction between them and the teachers. They spend time together...

X: Working.

S. M.: It’s a great synergy. Half of the harvest they give away to charity, and the other half they sell and use to pay with for their study trip. That’s a school! Then, we dig out a great profes-sor from Trebinje, from some secondary school there, she teaches Serbian language and litera-ture and works on Antigone with the kids. She turned into a freak and started to look for CDs with ancient Greek music, what food they ate, what they had for breakfast, lunch, you know. There is a church Gračanica there on a hill above Trebinje, with an amphitheatre looking at the river Trebišnjica... She wants to get the kids there to play Antigone dressed in togas.

S. M.: Then, there is a professor of physics who re-alised that the kids are not really keen on physics, and that teaching is not only about kids coming to school, but that he could also go where the kids go. He teaches a great part on Facebook. He simply re-alised that they are there, so he went there as well.

POSITIVE TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE

S. K.: I’m always in a dilemma with this town. I don’t like many of its’ features and its mentality, they are not close to me, and I think that those are not changeable. On the other hand those same features give very good results in some situations, when some gathering needs to oc-cur. But, I think that everything that stops, that doesn’t have continuity, is not positive. If we cel-ebrate the Olympics so much, that’s not for no reason. It probably represents the brightest mo-ments of victory of the character, wit, mind and the capability of this town to organise the most complex events and to fulfil such a task com-pletely, but then at the same moment to go as low as to charge Kirk Douglas 500 dollars for a glass of whisky, and then to destroy all that and have nothing for a long time. The same thing is with the siege, where the way we document it and research it, is a celebration of human char-acter and spirit. I’ve always stated that it would probably be the same in any other city, because human nature is universal, as well as the mind. It reacts similarly everywhere to certain circum-stances. But, that siege happened to us, it means we have that unique position, this town has such history. The people showed a high level of cre-ativity, a capability of self-preservation in crea-tive and witty ways. We would have become an incomparable, unique city, if we had just devel-oped that basic potential, and upgraded it to a global, universal situation. That’s not happened. In fact, the opposite happened. The mentality

94

has dropped, survival has remained as a way of life, but it has perverted to a degree where it becomes very dangerous and intolerable.

S.K.: If we manage to establish The Museum of Siege it would be a model of positive transfer of knowledge, universal, humanist values, where we celebrate mind, character, talent, human na-ture. So, we are, in fact, a hope for humanity. We have four years as proofs of that, regardless of the mentality from before and after. Cuba has its proof how to survive, how it is possible to sur-vive, and one feels relieved knowing that some-body has already survived something like that.

FLARES OF CRITIQUE

N. J.: Trust me, when I read a text with good arguments – that is a flare of utopia for me. Really, just the possibility of criticism, the criti-cism which doesn’t stumble on the first page of text, but goes until its very end, that is already success for me under these circumstances. Such critique and such arguments is not, as a rule, on the side of some hegemon ideology, it doesn’t have to waste its energy justifying itself, proving its values. (…) The Reis comes to the red carpet and cracks something stupid – that’s it. There are no arguments. You have one man’s point of view, founded only in his institutional authority, while for me now any well-founded critique is utopia in practice.

X: What is the next step after that?

N. J.: Who could know that? You simply cannot know that.

N. J.: You always assume a change for the better. If it’s not for the better, then for something dif-ferent. Let’s see how it would be if it wasn’t like it is. It’s obviously not good the way things are now. It is an assumption. Every critique starts with that. (…) We get the value through think-ing, through critical reflexion, and not through some planned teleology.

95

COSMIC POLITICS9. MULTICULTURAL INTEGRATION: where communities of different cultural ethnic and religious backgrounds coexist peaceably.


The statement by Angela Merkel that multicultur-

alism is dying out in Europe was the reason for

professors from different Bosnian universities to

start researching whether multiculturalism, that

B&H used to be so proud of, died out in Bosnia

as well. The professors from the Bosnian univer-

sities think that multiculturalism has been used

up – or even dead even in Bosnia, and that the

search for the identity will last for a long time.

Professor Mile Lasić, from The University of Mos-

tar thinks that multiculturalism in B&H is dead. “It

is about the fact that we welcomed the statement

by The PM Cameron and the Chancellor Merkel

about dying out of multiculturalism, in order

to mask the fact that multiculturalism actually

had been killed here and parallel societies had

been created. In those parallel societies creation

process we lost a lot, especially the elements

of co-existence from the late Yugoslavia, in all

post-Yugoslav countries parallel societies were

created, where all the minorities suffered, espe-

cially those real ones, national minorities, who

were punished double. And that was wanted.

The responsibility for that is not only on politi-

cal, but also on spiritual, academic teams, which

reproduce the wanted speech and the wanted

image. Further, the religious communities are

to blame, because they were collaborating with

politics, which was very damaging for faith, not

to mention politics, co-existence and multicul-

tural society. In any case, there was the death

of multiculturalism in the post-Yugoslavian

countries.” Professor Lasic states. Professor

Nerzuk Ćurak thinks very similarly, who said

that multiculturalism had been systematically

destroyed during the last two decades, which

resulted in the fact that B&H today “is the state

existing through its inexistence, and it doesn’t

exist through its existence. (…)

(Source: Vijesti.ba)

WHY ARE THERE NO CHINESE?

F. Š.: I want to leave Sarajevo all the time. To realise my utopia, whatever it is… OK, now I’m older, I have no desire to adapt to a new city. (…) When I come to a city, which I come to love later, at first I hate it, saying: I can’t be here, it’s horrible… In Berlin, I was thinking, how will I live here? Uh, see those immigrants, Turks, sad, pathetic, filthy. Like Sarajevo is super clean… But, I have a big fear of utopia, of what can be achieved. I was walking there… in a famous park… and those poor men barbecue there on Saturdays… a hundred thousand barbecue’s… from those who drink, to those who are… more Muslims. You know, they are great people, but they live in the past, fuck it. There is no assim-ilation. But there are some other Turks there, they play basketball, they’re successful… And this friend of mine in Berlin… is bragging that there are no Germans living in the building where she lives… some Escobar is on the top floor… that is their culture… When she came to Sarajevo, of course she’s intelligent, not looking at things superficially… I was living on Bre-ka, and then she went to a store, where some guy from Jordan worked… She asked me why

96

wouldn’t I make a reportage? I said with whom? With this Arab, she said. wasn’t it weird having Arabs in Sarajevo? I said, you think somebody finds it beautiful…? She has her own perspec-tive, since she is a leftist, an anti-German…

F. Š.: That’s why we can’t have utopia. Here people like to say that there are no skinheads, that we don’t have trash, because it is oriental here… it’s not typically Western… In America the biggest trash are Bosnians; they immediately come to hate black people… immediately… on sport fields. In fact, they are the Niggers… they came there. So the question for utopia is, why in Sarajevo…

X: ... there are no Chinese?

F. Š.: Yeah, like they eat a handful of rice, they leave nothing to the state, they steal… There was a Chinatown, they started building it… they could have made something out of it. That speaks of xenophobia.

F. Š.: I guess it would be better to have others, not these boring nations we have now. Wouldn’t that be a real mini-megalopolis?

X: Germans themselves said that… multicultur-alism had failed.

F. Š.: That concept should fail to a degree. Firstly, we are monocultural… how could we…?

UTOPIAN CITY IN B&H REALITY

F. Š.: In Sarajevo we have a different perspective – we don’t live in reality… when I travel to East Bosnia, to make a reportage and afterwards come back to Sarajevo, I immediately kiss the ground – oh my dear Sarajevo, I missed you. Because, firstly, there are no civilised conditions for people living there, and then Sarajevo is like a new Jeru-salem in the best sense; a real utopian city.

X: In Bosnian reality, Sarajevo is utopian?

F. Š.: Yes, you have Mostar, it’s a beautiful town. I’d go and live there, regarding its beauty. But it is a divided town… I couldn’t live there… Then you have Banja Luka, which is an ethnically cleansed town…. I couldn’t live there as well, I mean I feel better in Belgrade than in Banja Luka. Sometimes I go there, but it has been totally christianised and serbianised, and that is so stupid.

F. Š.: Some people live there, fighting… man… they tore down all the mosques… I’m not a religious guy, you know… but there used to be something, fuck it… I’m looking now in my town… the orthodox church stands there, be-cause we didn’t have anything to burn it down with…. I wouldn’t have burnt it down, for sure. But maybe, I would… So now if we had that capsule for self-assembly, I’d show you that unity of religions. So, there is a Catholic church burnt down by the chetniks, there is a mosque burnt down by the chetniks, and all that within a hundred metres, maybe less. So, literally, a post-card… a utopian one.

X: How much does that past prevent them from thinking about the future?

F. Š.: Man… Omarska… Omarska is pure sci-ence fiction, as a town. I’ve concluded… that the landscape design and the architectural features of those houses are completely opposed to what lies inside those people… It is fascinating that this town lives an idyllic life. And, half a metre from there you have…

X: A concentration camp.

97

F. Š.: Yes, there was a concentration camp there… Those are hangars… when you get there, you can’t tell that there used to be such a thing around. But, when I was passing through Omar-ska, for the anniversary of the concentration camp, there was police all around… There came an epic old man, epic in the sense of his appear-ance… with gray hair, strong: easy, easy, you are on my land. Now we, journalists… look at him… it reminds you on that. So how can he go into the future, he’s completely erased the past, he erased himself. I’m not talking about war criminals.

F. Š.: That’s why Sarajevo is already utopia.

X: You think people here have been faced with the past enough?

F. Š.: I don’t think that. But, then again… At the end of the day, all that is going on, all what we do, I don’t know… there are lots of us… a big town… Let’s not talk about war anymore…

UNDEFINED

A. H.: I’ve been thinking about that question – what Sarajevo’s future can be? I think what can be done in Sarajevo, cannot be done in any oth-er capital in the region. Simply also because we are cursed with our position, and the mixture we have, that also gives us that extra possibility for some things on the regional level, that could never be done in Zagreb, or Belgrade. Because those two sides are, how to say, defined, in a way. We are not defined. We can belong here or there. That need for determination is a problem, but if you look at it as a potential, we can really do whatever we want, that could be relevant for the region, both geographically and because of all of this story and our past.

IDENTITY, POTENTIAL AND PROBLEM

N. K.: We have a much better balance between those big religions than in France, or Italy… I think that identity is one of Bosnia’s greatest po-tentials, as well as our biggest problem. It doesn’t matter that I agree with he assumption that

identity is an imaginary concept, made up by elites; still such things mean something. I person-ally see the identity of Bosnia and Herzegovina in a hybrid state, and I see it as a big advantage. The fact that I am from Herzegovina, from a three way crossing, from such a geographical point, always gives me a sense of advantage. It is a feeling of wealth that I inherited and have not deserved it, so now I have to justify it somehow. It is not a story of a sparrow crossing from a mosque rooftop to a church rooftop in Sarajevo, that is a postcard story. I have a possibility to look at things from a multiple-perspective, be-cause I have different roots, while society here teaches us the opposite. They speak of the purity of identity, which always leads to some dark ideas.

X: Isn’t your idea of identity, in fact, a utopia? What would be a utopian identity in Bosnia and Herzegovina?

N.K.: A utopian identity is that the Bosniacs have been born from stardust and that they’ve never mixed with anybody else. Also Serbs, and Croats… That is a nationalist utopia.

X: And, the other one…

N. K.: That other one would be, how to say, a cosmopolitan utopia. If people would start ac-cepting – OK I’m mixed! I think that it is about individual effort to overcome that. Well, a socie-ty could propagate that too. And why somebody doesn’t represent such political or cultural ideas, that is a thing of…

X: Some engineering.

N. K.: Of engineering and of the magic circle of auto-territorialisation where we have locked ourselves in.

98

LACKING SPACE FOR EXCHANGE BEYOND MARKET

10. GOOD QUALITY ARCHITECTURE AND PHYSICAL SURROUNDING: to an agreeable, stimulating physical form achieved trough contemporary architecture of high quality and retention and sensitive restoration of the historic built heritage.


Do you think that Sarajevo needs

more squares / parks? (77)

Yes. .............................................................90,91%

No. ................................................................9,09%

No opinion. ...................................................... 0%

(Source: Ankete.me)

The Marshall Tito army barracks is a com-

plex that should have become the University

Campus. In 2000 Master Plan was drawn of

the future campus. The University Campus

should have enabled young people to have

better and more qualitative higher educa-

tion. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina is a

country, which doesn’t “like” young people,

nor it invests in their education. (…) In 2004,

instead of seeing the completed campus, The

Council of Ministers decided, and on the 3rd

of February, 2005, The House of Represent-

atives of The Parliament of B&H confirmed

unanimously that 44.175 m2 be sold to the

USA. We are talking about the land and real

estate within the former Marshall Tito army

barracks. The USA will pay 12.868.503,51 KM,

which is 291 KM per square metre in one of

the most attractive locations in the city.

(Source: Infobar.ba)

GO TO THE SQUARE, MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN

S. R.: City squares are places for exchange, where pensioners play chess, have fun, but also exchange information. Then, they are happy and content. I remember when some kids

99

flew model planes on this square in front of the church… To me, squares are places where things can happen by chance, and I would always say – go to a square, make something happen. It is public space to me. And the space is as public as much as it is being used, while politics likes to make squares into monuments to itself… or turn it into a usable space. (…) What do we have there in front of the National Theatre? What do we have there, in front of the Art Gallery? – Parking lots!

NO SQUARE

Z. Ć.: What ever you try to do here – utopia.

Z. Ć.: So, now there is a whole upgrade to that story where we don’t have a city square. That is a real utopia, that it goes underground, some-where around McDonald’s.

X: An underground square?

Z. Ć.: No. Traffic.

CONSTRUCTIVE MARKET PLACES

X: And that more pretty image, could you find it in everyday life?

A. T.: Market places, only them. They are full of life, they are vital, even in a negative sense, like small scams. So, they have that dynamics in themselves. They have a component of negoti-ation, bargaining – it’s good, no good. They are constructive for society, for social dialogue.

IF IT WERE…

S. M.: What I would like… What I wouldn’t like…

S. M.: I’d like that kafanas are open until 6 in the morning. Kafana is somehow still an agora to me, or a good party, and then you talk to people, hang around, communicating one on one. Non-verbal communication is as impor-tant as the verbal. There you don’t have slashes, exclamation marks… I don’t understand a half

of it, when somebody sends me an email with colon and a D. What’s that?

S.M.: Then, I’d like museums to be open until late.

X: Late at night?

S.M.: Yes. Simply from 10 PM to 2 AM.

S.M.: For instance, when the department store Sarajka was torn down, I was longing that the National Library would be placed there. To me, it should be in the city centre, that it is a lively place. Of course, I was aware that it would be a shopping mall, but never mind. Or if the Ja-jce army barracks were to become a centre for young researchers, half of it ateliers, and the other half science. To have young people work, research, make new friends. No, it will probably be a five-star hotel and a casino…

S. M.: I’d like everybody to take seriously two children’s songs we used to learn in primary school – There Is a Kingdom In The World and Take a Big Nail. I’m deadly serious.

X: Why?

S. M.: Well, sing them, and let’s behave like in those two songs, which are not even children’s songs anymore.

80 000 M2

S. A.: The hierarchy is pseudo-feudal. Bosmal, BBI Centre (I don’t like to call it BBI, but Sara-jka), Bristol – they’ve all been made for money laundry exclusively. And not the money from the war, but what they stole after the war…

S. A.: They got a permit for 30.000 m2, and made 80.000. We don’t need to discuss that fur-ther, how far that feudal arrogance has gone.

S. A.: Bosmal is a miss, it is idiotic that such a wealthy country like Malaysia, such a techno-logically advanced country… they could have

100

built the highway here. And, to come and build a high-rise in some marginal Sarajevan quarter is crazy.

ARCHITECTS, PRODUCERS OF SPACE

S. R.: I think that architecture, or urbanism, cannot be viewed in simple terms, when you are expected to build houses, places where people will spend their time. It all has several layers. And if you get a task to deal only with one lay-er… I’m not sure it should be a goal of today’s architecture.

S. R.: As a common architect, I follow civiliza-tional movements. I have to understand them. I deal with the past too. I learn from the past. Sarajevo is not specific in anything. The co-ex-istence happened here, it came organically, and it has been nourished that way. However, that Sarajevo doesn’t exist today. My goal is to understand those big global changes within my activities. (…) I think that architecture is educational, it is a frame for something internal. Man should live a better life, feel better and be a part of a flow toward something better. I, as an architect, produce space, that space educates the inhabitant, the user.

CITY OF INTELLIGENT NETWORKS

S. R.: I have definitely not moved from my past vision of Sarajevo in 2020. In order for

the citizens of Sarajevo, or our community to function, we need places where people will meet each other. It would be a linked city, a city of meeting and socialising. The place of those meetings I call agorae, not forums. An agora is a democratic approach, where everybody can par-ticipate, while a forum has a hierarchical struc-ture, representatives, as in politics – as soon as one enters the forum they change their skin and colour. In agorae it wasn’t like that, a Greek agora was a democratic and open place for dis-cussion, for exchange of thoughts. I held those agorae the future of relations, information, ideas and knowledge. And I think that I finished back then like this, symbolically – We can stand with our feet on the ground, and still have our heads in the clouds. It was a good utopia for me, one which is positively directed, which lifts you up.

S. R.: It’s the idea of a city linked by an intelligent network, where the information system of the city is open, free, and thirdly, you have… infor-mation, knowledge… What does an intelligent network mean? It may seem ridiculous now, but today you have that flood of wireless transfer of energy. I used to think then that knowledge has its energy, so if you can transfer electricity remotely, why not knowledge as well. I was in-tensively dealing with what it meant to see with your frontal lobe, and what it meant to see with your rear lobe. And so, when I was setting that up, I tried to create a physical structure. Because, the question is, what such a city structure physically looks like… where there is no difference between a student and a citizen. In the meantime brain science has developed a lot, and we have become insensitive because of other things, too civilised… we don’t know how to use our emotional states.

101

IMPLEMENTING DISFUNCTIONALITY

11. HARMONISATION OF FUNCTIONS: where living, working, travelling and the pursuit of social activities are as closely interrelated as possible.


The State Department states that Bosnia

and Herzegovina is a country where politi-

cal difficulties have not been overcome yet,

and where you can easily become a target

with no warning. Therefore, the American

State Department warns their citizens about

crime in Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially

emphasising terrorism and religious fanat-

ics. (…) “In Sarajevo on the 28th of October,

2011, The Embassy of The United States

was attacked, and a local policeman was

wounded. While most of the citizens value

the international community interventions,

there is a small group of those who show

animosity toward foreigners”, the State

Department stets further. (…) Americans

are advised not to engage in arguments

regarding traffic accidents in Sarajevo, then

not to carry big amounts of cash with them,

to be careful of pickpockets, especially in

trams. They remind that the B&H citizens

rarely carry rucksacks, and if they do they

become an easy target for the pickpockets,

who can rob them without them even notic-

ing. Americans are advised to respect the

laws of B&H, especially regarding opiates.

(…) Weather conditions during the winter

months are something that has to be taken

into account, according to The State De-

partment, because “flights from Sarajevo

are cancelled oftentimes, due to heavy fog,

and tourists have to change their itinerary

at the last minute.” According to them, B&H

is not a country where disabled persons

can manage very well, and due to polluted

air and lots of allergens, the persons with

breathing problems are advised not to go

there. B&H is also “decorated” with mines

and bad roads. (…) They add that the roads

are not like in the US. They also state that

there are lot of interruptions in traffic, due

to landslides or traffic accidents, and that

the roads are in very bad condition – un-

safe, wavy and narrow, and also that one

can bump into badly marked road works.

(Source: Republikainfo.com)

102

CIVILISATION

Z. Ć.: When those computer games appeared after the war, you know, where you build your own empire…

X: Age of Empires, Civilisation.

Z. Ć.: Yeah, are they called like that? You have to build a city, and you have to give your city this and that, in order to have your citizens sat-isfied. Then some attack you, and you defend… all those things. Somehow I got my idea from there, after the war when all the alleged rebuild-ing started, that none of the Municipal and Can-tonal officers, if you ask me, is allowed to work until they complete one of those games… Just to realise that a city is not buildings, but that it should serve people.

IMPOSSIBILITY OF GOVERNING

A. T.: I realised, since I’ve been thinking of Sa-rajevo, the first thought that comes to mind is always a problem that we are facing. And that problem is, from my perspective, unsolvable. It assumes action, not even by Sarajevo itself, as a community, but a wider action, and therefore I called Sarajevo a dystopia, a realised dystopia by the lords of war and post-war. So, my only uto-pia would be to bring Sarajevo back to its zero state, and that was its state from before the war, when it started developing as a contemporary city. Now the question arises – what is a city? And, why is Sarajevo not a city? In the sense of its function it isn’t. It doesn’t function as a city. It is an undefined space in every sense. And to speak of Sarajevo as an isolated phenomenon, without taking into account the context of the state, is almost impossible, because continuity has been interrupted, and that is the continuity of progress.

A. T.: Sarajevo doesn’t have the strength to be administered, it doesn’t have creative, nor intel-lectual strength. Sarajevo is a city without in-dustry. Sarajevo is a city where they turn off the water supply at midnight. Sarajevo doesn’t have any water. Sarajevo is an impotent city. Sarajevo

has been on life support constantly, since the war.

A. T.: Sarajevo cannot be managed because the city’s entitlements have been divided to the Cap-ital of the State, the Capital of the Federation, the administrative centre of the Canton... Then, it does not exercise its right to local self-govern-ment, guaranteed by the European Convention. It cannot exercise it, because a part of adminis-trative entitlements, for example on educational institutions, is under the Canton’s authority, and another part is under the municipalities, so we can’t know the limits. We don’t know, for example where is the border between the Stari Grad Municipality and the Centar Municipality, so we have a fictional border on the Ferhadija Street. And then if one municipality forbids the selling of hot wine, you just need to cross that imaginary border and you can sell your hot wine. So, we cannot achieve equality in those banal segments of life. Or the border between the Novo Sarajevo Municipality and the Centar Municipality is somewhere in the middle of the Vilson’s Promenade. So, we can’t say that Vilson’s Promenade is governed by the City as a whole, although all its citizens use it. Not to mention that Sarajevo is a city on a potential new bor-der, if the country would dissolve, which is not unrealistic. Therefore, Sarajevo is being reartic-ulated all the time, and it’s being held on stand-by for a possible new war. (…) I’m not saying that it would be better if the city was governed as a whole, but then we would, at least, know to whom to complain about our problems and who is responsible for what.

UNMASKING OR HARMONISING THE MYTHS

X: Spirit. What about the spirit?

A. T.: It’s a myth. The story of the Sarajevo spirit leans on its pre-war past, when it was simply a sum of good things, when life was better. We had the Olympic Games, for example, organised by Sarajevo – for most of its part. And those Olympics returned 80% of the investment without marketing. With the marketing it was

103

profitable. We had the contemporary art exhibi-tion Yugoslavian Documenta. Music from Sara-jevo was listened to even outside Yugoslavia. So, some extraordinary stuff was happening, which were creating an ambience where everybody felt comfortable. Simply, nobody felt any decay. That city was in such euphoria of progress, that something was created that people simply declared the Sarajevo spirit. So, now, from this perspective, when they see something that re-sembles that, they say that it’s the Sarajevo spirit, it smells like the Sarajevo spirit.

(...)

A. T.: In order for Sarajevo to be a city, it has to get over its myths, it has to articulate them dif-ferently. For example, the Olympics, they stand as an icon over Sarajevo, in Sarajevo’s symbolic nomination it holds a very high place… And then you have The Olympic Museum, which is a ruin, or for the Anniversary of the Olympics you have Olympic halls coming down under heavy snow, first Zetra, then Skenderija. Then, Sarajevo has applied to become The European Culture Capital in 2014, and meanwhile the cul-tural institutions are being shut down. The Ars Aevi project, for The Museum of Contemporary Art, was declared during the war as one of the state’s priorities, when some famous artists gave their works as their protest against the siege of Sarajevo… But that museum still doesn’t exist. (…) Then again, that story of Sarajevo as a Eu-ropean Jerusalem, as the multicultural centre, there we also have a small problem. Although the word multiculturalism is easily used and is often given a wrong meaning, in Sarajevo, in its public discourse, there is no discussion of inter-culturalism, except for someone writing an essay on it…

A. T.: (…) Multiculturalism already assumes intersections, it assumes interaction of cultures. Sarajevo would become a city if it accepted to discuss interculturalism, as that would as-sume talking about human rights, all what we interpret as the main thing for the Western civilisation. Inside that, of course, there would

exist these independent cultures, free to present themselves, to interact – but they would never be the ones to influence the fate of the city, it would rather be influenced by different statutes, conventions, which would have to be respected, rather than cultural customs and norms.

Y: How could that thing… with myths get solved?

A. T.: Well, either to harmonise reality with those myths somehow, and then follow them consistently, or to terminate them completely. Not in the way to forget them, because you can’t simply forget, but just not to promote them, and to become aware of what we are and that those myths belong to the past. Otherwise we have paradoxes.

DELAYING THE FUTURE

A. T.: We don’t know what could happen, in fact. Really, we can elect some principled politicians in future elections, who will put natural and energy resources under the state’s control, and then fill up the development bank by exploit-ing them, after which that development bank will give housing loans to young people with very low interest rates, who will, let’s say take a loan with a 3% interest rate and buy a flat and be happy and content in that flat. It could happen. Those are factually three moves – we take control over the resources, we invest the

104

exploitation into the development bank, and the bank creates development projects. The citizens from those projects…

X: That is on one level…

A. T.: That is an illusion, but something could be solved like that, and most probably it won’t. On the other hand it could suddenly happen that the NGO sector stops adapting 100% to the expectations of the neo-liberal capital and starts thinking about the social and economic compo-nent of society.

X: Does the NGO sector have such potential?

A. T.: If we look at the number of those organ-isations, which deal with all kinds of things, I’d say… But, if we look at the lack of response to a number of things, and that we have just a few, which are dedicated to their mission and persistent in their vision… As a third option, global changes could occur, which could have an influence here for things to get better… If something rolls from somewhere, let’s get into that snowball and shape it as well. But no great miracles. I mean, let’s understand each other, utopia is something that is delayed all the time; it is bate that attracts us to go ahead. We will never achieve it in any case, but the question is how close can we get to it. With the capacity we have, regardless of all our networking, and with all our energy invested into fixing all the broken things. It’s not even a full step toward that uto-pia, to be realised here, in Sarajevo. Therefore, they are there to serve us not to sink completely, rather than that we could aim to get closer to them. That is my pessimistic vision.

105

UNCREATED COMMONS

12. PARTITIPATION: in pluralistic democratic structures and in urban management characterized by co-operation between all the various partners, the principle of subsidiarity, information and freedom from over-regulation.


Although there is currently a significant num-

ber of initiatives in B&H, regarding educat-

ing the public on legal system, a compara-

tive analysis, as well as interviews with the

representatives of relevant organisations,

have shown that these current efforts are not

enough, and that they are not in accordance

with the best practice. That fact is especially

emphasised if we estimate the need for such

educational programmes. A complex legal

system, a post-conflict context and a num-

ber of new legal institutes and regulations,

combined with complicated network of legal

institutions and levels of authority, create a

real legal labyrinth, which even people with

law degrees cannot manage. We shouldn’t

leave out factors such as high rate of poverty,

which was the reason for other countries to

start with such initiative, and now have much

better organised systems of public education.

Or a significant problem of minor delinquency,

where, according to the relevant data, such

programs can have a preventive role. The

overall situation is additionally complicated by

the impossibility of reading electronic news-

papers for free, as well as the printed ones.

(Source: Education of Public On the Legal System in

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dženana Hrlović, pg. 60)

106

IT’S NOT HIM, IT WAS ME

S. M.: If we are talking on some personal level, to me the greatest utopia in the Balkans is the story about taking responsibility, and here I don’t mean taking responsibility for war crimes, with everybody saying Ok he confessed, I’ll do that too – but starting with basic stuff – when you step on my foot say sorry, when you do something bad say Sorry, I didn’t mean it… And somehow when you talk about responsibility here, you always have the same thing: it was not me, it was him, even if it’s about throwing your garbage in the entrance hall of your building. So, it is on a very basic level. To me that would be utopia… that ideal way of living, when com-munication is so clear, so assertive and so open that we can always say what is on our minds.

WE?

A. H.: Is it about people here, but there is no teamwork here. We can’t feel anybody working as a group, simply said, that somebody thinks like a group. Not I, not you, but…

Y: ... we.

A. H.: We. And that is the biggest problem, I think. Here each individual thinks for himself or herself. Literally, from a stray dog to the May-or. Of course that the snowstorm made every-body first think about themselves, and then think wider, if they have any energy left. I think that is generally the problem with society in the Western world. We’ve lost somewhere along the way, that the solution is within the group, not individual. That is a utopia to me – believing that we can do something as a group.

S. K.: What would be the city’s achievability according to the mentality of its citizens? So, if you said that there is a global trend of associat-ing, can Sarajevo hold up to that? So, we come again to the fact that not everything is about money.

S. K.: When somebody tries to tell me how won-derful time they had in Sarajevo – well, tell me

where did you have that wonderful time? – OK yes, there is something wonderful always. There is that atmosphere, that spirit of Sarajevo obvi-ously exists. Then, when you screw it on a big venture, then to another one, that is the proof of communication and reinventing. But you have to call up to everybody individually to say come together, and then you can communicate. Let there be emotions, love, communication, exchange of wisdom, knowledge… As Rambo Amadeus would say – become charming again!

CONTROL OF THE PERSONAL, FRUSTRATED BY THE PUBLIC

S. Ć.: When I hear about some initiatives like organic food production, aroma therapy, ki-nesiology – I have friends in those fields – I think: hm, organic food… I’d rather have my building entrance cleaned. I think that even photography as a hobby has something to do with controlled reality… I’ll take a perfect photo of something with my camera, because I can control that space that much. I think it has to do with the frustration with public space. It is a sub-consciousness maybe, because everything was public before and it was taken care of much more than the private. On the other hand it is the same amount of frustration when you enter your building and see all the horror. You have a need to enter your flat and obsessively rub your wine glasses and to be surrounded by people who don’t look like they belong to that reality, and to wear the most beautiful stuff.

S. Ć.: The system is in a symbiosis with our public space. The lack of hope, projected by the media, in fact, suits that system. Then you ac-cept compromise; political, or any other… Then there is calculating, total absence of ideals… And the political system, which sends us a mes-sage – people, don’t dream of the possible. No-body thinks of the possibility of changing that system completely. We should radically vote for people who maybe don’t have any chance, but – at least until you get thirty – act in accordance with your own convictions…

107

S. Ć.: I’m an unfounded optimist. Although, I think that some space is being created on the basis of oversaturation. It’ll never come to a revolution here, of course, we are too lazy, we like having coffee too much to protest in the cold. But we are collectively fed up and that could result in something. Not utopia, not the one where we all would have some space to exchange goods and money, but I think there is some space, primarily for creative work and for some completely alternative political action, which has no space in organised systems. I have a feeling that in the next five years some drastic changes could occur.

X: Please God. It all reduces to that.

S. Ć.: It’s not a healthy attitude.

S. Ć.: And, how to get there? Hm, when I say individual action, simply there is so little com-petition in Sarajevo for anything. Maybe the only private competition exists between betting houses, and stuff like that. But, talking about the people we socialise with, it is unbelievable how poor we are in our aspirations and ambitions.

OPEN GAME RULES

AH: It would be a success, if we could balance somehow in finding a measure in relations, that it’s not too stable, but to consciously accept cha-os, to design it, to build it into society in those places where you think it is needed, or it’s not damaging. That conscious introduction of chaos into the principle of society is a challenge. Be-cause Europeans are tired of...

X: Taming the chaos?

A. H.: No, I just want to make a point. We live in a chaos, which has been imposed to us through politics. And we need a minimum of stability here. I think it is the economic stability. And that we can all agree on something. I think that they consciously avoid doing. Because I think, that a minimum of chaos could be built into a stabile construction.

Y: Someone has to determine the game rules.

A. H.: Someone has to determine the game rules, but the game has to be accessible to every-one. Not only to the professionals, the big ones, the economically strong ones – but individuals too. If we talk about building a city, in Oslo they’ve sold a big quarter, like Marindvor let’s say, to a group, a consortium of companies. Im-agine they make a mistake there, the area would become dead. And why wouldn’t be possible that a group of people participate there? Then they have to be given some conditions. Like, OK, you can buy this land, but you have to build it in ten years. It is introducing the informal into a formal city, and vice versa, but with the game rules determined. (...) The problem of slopes is often mentioned here in Sarajevo. I think that the problem of these settlements on the slopes is the least problem in comparison what the col-leagues architects do.

SOCIETAL WORK

N. N. Č.: I’m using the concept of emancipatory political potential, in the sense of active partici-pation in the community.

X: Why is that a political category?

N. N. Č.: Since Aristotle, political unity has been participating in public. It is acting for the sake of community, not in the sense of actively being a politician. Well now, with him there is this

108

strict distinction between public, between… what is benevolence, what is reproduction of family, feeding… Within the feminist thought all those distinctions between public and private have been discussed a lot, how much we should separate them. So that there are many different conceptualisations of it… (...) Thus it’s not po-litical to be politically active, but rather in the sense of activity, or as we used to say in social-ism: social work, social engagement, work for the community… Simply political…

N. N. Č.: I’m interested in what is done inside the community, I’m interested what does it look like… I’m interested in what society cares for, and in that sense I’m interested what policies exist regarding certain things. And now, the fact is that each of us feels those social policies, even the one that does not have any interest for the public, for common space. However, there are, I’d say, a number of people, who, except the problems that concern them directly, really don’t have any interest for the public…

X: And, how do they imagine their lives?

N. N. Č.: They probably imagine that the state should be the one who will take care of everything. And that is a mystification of poli-tics, it is like the position of the victim, which is, in some cases, very comfortable.

LIKE A FLASH IN TIME

N. J.: The space for utopia, emancipation, it can exist… Well, when there was this first snow wave, which buried us, that first weekend you go out on the street with a shovel and you realise that some other 15 people have come out. That Saturday was one of the unbelievable days of my life. There is a great scene showing that… in Witness by Peter Weir, when Amishes build a shed…

X: A barn?

N. J.: Yes, a barn. And they all gather, the whole village… I think that Frederick Jameson men-tioned that somewhere as a typical example of utopian community, that emancipatory poten-tial, which can be seen on a screen, and in the big Hollywood production. But, Amishes, it’s an organic type of a community. While we talk here about people, who came out to, actually, remove snow from their own cars. Nobody real-ly came out to clean the whole street, but when we came down, looked at each other, of course we cleaned the whole street. We’ll help out here, why shouldn’t we help out even there, and so on, everything was clean.

N. J.: Let’s say that the word utopia is decep-tive, maybe it is not about a location, maybe it is about a time, maybe about a flash, about a moment when we should recognise and know how to use it. So maybe utopia is a moment for criticism, criticism in its own temporality, rather than some particularity in space, coordinates…

109

DEVELOPMENT OF PERSONAL ECONOMY

13. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: where the local authority, in a determined and enlightened manner, assumes responsibility for creating, directly or indirectly, economic growth.


Imagine a country with unemployment rate of

95%, and the inflation greater than 8%. That

is how people live in Zimbabwe, the country

holding the first place on the chart on which

nobody wants to be. Poverty index for 197

countries has been calculated by The Busi-

ness Insider, by adding the unemployment

rate with the inflation rate and the index of

consumer prices. The list has 25 countries,

with Bosnia and Herzegovina on the twen-

tieth place, states Danas.hr. (…) Bosnia and

Herzegovina is on the 20th place, with the

index of 45,5%.


I’M LATE, BUT I’M AHEAD OF YOU

S. Ć.: Of course, we are absolute beginners re-garding capitalism, we are a hundred years be-hind. I’d not seen my friends from America for a long time and then I went there to New York, and suddenly, they all had gardens on their rooftops, selling their vegetables, exchanging, and so on. Then, I was thinking how we were

just entering that phase that everybody else had gone through thirty years ago, and my op-timistic vision is that we could skip a few steps and immediately go to the organic production. Let’s skip the part with plastic Chinese toys. So, I think that this apathy is a product of general disappointment in the post-war, and then what else we have but to be dumbed by TV and countless starlets in this town.

X: OK, it’s not just here. It’s the trend… of escap-ing to shopping…

S. Ć.: But, I’m saying that in other countries they make full circle, and here we are still full speed ahead.

BEGGARS’ MENTALITY

A. T.: Sarajevo has the victim’s position, which prevents it from any development, because the victim’s position always leans on somebody else’s help, without its own action. The termina-tion of cultural institutions, in fact the threat of

110

terminating them, is manipulated to show them as even poorer than they are. To present your-self poorer than you are is the basic beggars’ postulate. Here we have that beggars’ mentality. So, we always beg for something, from these cultural institutions, to religious communities – the power centres are lamenting the most of all! Thus, they only ask for something with no ade-quate programme, solution, strategy of cultural development, no strategy of sport development.

INDEX OF CITIZENS’ SATISFACTION

A. T.: If someone looked at the number of cars, they would say we had a good standard… In fact, a car is perceived as a status symbol and, generally we measure the progress of this en-vironment through income, through number of cars, number of homeless, etc. and nobody dares to measure the living standard according to the index of the citizens’ satisfaction. People measure their dissatisfaction by comparing, and they have much better examples in their own past and in environments which are not that far from here, like almost the whole Soviet Block, which is today integrated in the European Un-ion, like Czech Republic, Poland, Romania…

OCCUPYING PUBLIC SPACE

S. Ć.: I’ve expected much more from this transi-tion, from the people in transition in fact. That is why, I’m sorry that we haven’t used better this period of conditional anarchy. To occupy the public space. Half-legal occupation of public space is only possible in this transitional period, when there is no chance for it to be legally sanc-tioned, since they deal with much worse things. So I was expecting that people would occupy that public space more, in any way. You’ve certainly heard during these conversations a lot about the adrenaline, about occupying the public space during the war, where they would empty a store, move in and organise it. Today, in my street alone there are a dozen of abandoned business spaces, which probably don’t have their legal status solved. I’m wondering why someone doesn’t just occupy them, until their legal status

is solved. I’m looking at those ladies I buy pro-duce from, they’re freezing in some passages. What could they do? They could just paint one of those spaces, no windows, and then they sell there. I think the power lies in numbers. We shouldn’t have an illusion that we’ll become Denmark or Germany.

S. Ć.: I’m not blaming the City authorities, I’m blaming us. There is a lack of courage. We planted vegetables and fruit during the war, why don’t we do it now? Then, people were marking their spaces with some small fence and planting. (…) I was excited when I saw the other day that somebody planted some onion in the middle of New Sarajevo. OK, great, somebody has finally taken law into their hands and said: I don’t have my land, but I will plant onion here and eat it… So, for me, the public space, at least in the transition, should be much more exciting. If you go to some half-regulated cities – I’ve been to Damascus – I was so excited by some half-legal, non-stop trade and the creativity of people to make their own corner anywhere, a space where they can sell something. All those underdevel-oped cities – unfortunately we are one of those – are much more exciting. Even Prishtina has that energy, which we don’t have.

S. Ć.: I think that only criminals in Sarajevo re-alised – take the law into your own hands – not a lady, who sells tomatoes.

111

GRASSROOTED ZONES14. SUSTAINED DEVELOPMENT: sustained development: where local authorities attempt to achieve reconciliation of economic development and environmental protection.


Citizens can file applications for legalisation

of illegally built buildings in The Canton of

Sarajevo only for three more weeks, when

the deadline given by The Ministry of Spatial

Planning and Protection of Environment ex-

pires. “During the last week of December we

received the most applications. According to

the estimates by The Construction Institute,

on the territory of The Canton of Sarajevo

there are currently more than 50.000 build-

ings waiting to be legalised. Most of them are

in Ilidža and Novi Grad municipalities, where

wild construction is blossoming.” Zlatko Pet-

rović, the Minister of Spatial Planning and

Protection of Environment, told to Dnevni

avaz. As Petrović stated, there will be no le-

galisation of the buildings built on actively

sliding lands, water protected zones and near

roads. The Minister added that due to insuf-

ficient number of employees in municipality

services, the applications will be gradually

taken in consideration and resolved. “The

buildings that don’t meet the criteria will have

to be removed,” stated Petrović, adding that

the illegal construction is one of the main

causes for landslides in our canton.


OVERLAPPING OF CITY AND VILLAGE

A. T.: Citizens are conditioned by village, as much as the peasants are conditioned by cities. It still functions the same way it used to in so-cialism. But, both cities and villages are much poorer than before. A peasant cannot live well from what he produces, so he has a job in the

112

city as well. And a citizen, if he doesn’t have his own field, buys those produce on a market. Here, the village and the city are so much used to each other, that they have almost grown into each other. (…) Somewhere else it would be unthinkable to see in a company’s hall – let’s say an auditing company – a man with a box of tomatoes, or potatoes, because it’s cold outside, and he asked them to let him in. And, then the people inside are buying stuff from him. Here, that is not unusual.

GRAY ZONE OF RURBAN

N. J.: Utopia doesn’t necessarily have to be a city. One of the motives by which Bosnian cine-matography was recognised in the eighties, not just cinematography, but Bosnian culture, even today, that Bosnianhood, is It’s Like That Baby, When a Bosnian Kisses. There we have in play some kind of utopia, some Bosnian identity and male domination. We think it’s been like that forever, but if we do a little research we see that it is relatively new, created. We can even deter-mine the year when this Bosnian rural pastoral was created, as a utopia. It was in 1974 and 1975. We can even determine the location where it was created – those are Borike.

X: Really?

N. J.: In 1974 and 1975 two things happened in Borike: Ivica Matić shot his film Woman With A Landscape – nobody was going to shoot there then – and the band Bijelo Dugme went there. They recorded their album What Would You Give To Be In My Shoes. It was the album with the cover where we see a naked woman’s ass with a peasant’s arm around it, dressed in peas-ant’s fur. And that’s it. It’s Like That Baby, When A Bosnian Kisses and literally Woman With A Landscape. That was actually a total media hype, a campaign. I think that rock critc Vrdoljak branded Bijelo Dugme, after their first album, as shepherd’s rock. Then, they accepted that com-pletely: aha, you want shepherd’s rock, let’s do some, we’ll go up there among the shepherds and their sheep and there you are – Bosnian

pastoral. If we look historically at the Bosnian cinematography, a Bosnian pastoral as such had not existed before Woman With A Landscape. And how was that landscape concepted before that? As a place of revolution, as a place from The Second World War, where we fought and conquered that space. Remember how all Par-tisan movies used to begin. In some Nazi lair some officers gather around, open maps and say: Let’s go there. Then partisans come and say – no use of your maps, we know this space, we are its owners.

N. J.: In that context that landscape functioned as something completely different. It was a revolutionary arena. By the appearance of the Bosnian pastoral, the same landscape was ideo-logically interpreted in a totally different man-ner. Instead of revolution, instead of progress of the relentless dynamics, it became the numbest place in the world. Those images literally freeze the pastoral, you don’t need to change anything.

N. J.: That return to the roots appeared as a criticism of modernism, of Yugoslavian moder-nity, socialist modernity. And what lied behind that turnover… the surplus of green, surplus of nature, manifested in super-male, exaggerated machoism? In fact, when you watch those films you see that women are the agents of the new, of modernity, they appear dressed in fashion clothes and, of course, frustrate those men, who would like to hug them, but they can’t. In that sense we can see that utopia doesn’t have to be related to cities, and even, in Yugoslavian context of transition from the socialism to the post-socialism, it would be worthy to question that relationship between the city and the vil-lage, or that… gray zone between those two locations.

(...)

N. J.: I mean, that relationship is manifested in the worst of ways. It’s that establishing of the difference between city and village, through some exclusion, segregation of people who are not citizens, who’ve come and they can’t learn

113

anything… like – if only they hadn’t come, where we would have been today. That assump-tion that the peasants profited by coming to cities… Like, it was the same thing after The Second World War, and it’s like that now again, and we would have developed as a city, it would all be natural, if they hadn’t been coming here every forty years or so, and then, there you have a new war, and so on. I think that’s com-pletely bizarre.

N. J.: That’s why I’m not convinced that peasants are responsible for some architectural perver-sions we have in Sarajevo, the people who used to live in barns, far from asphalt, roads, with no sewage… It seems to me that we all are from the countryside, in the sense that those famous six degrees of separation don’t distinct us from the closest peasant. When we sit here, in the centre of Sarajevo – we see countryside. If we look east, north, wherever, we’ll see countryside. That’s why I’m saying that we deal with a kind of grey zone all the time.

MANUAL FOR URBANISM

S. R.: In fact, mahala is like 60 houses or so… that is the real measure, a neighbourhood. In that street, at the beginning of mahala, there is a drink fountain, there is a mosque, there is the mosque’s yard, a graveyeard by the mosque, there is a grocery store, a shop and a bakery. It’s at the entrance, toward the city, at crossings, there is a mosque and then you enter the maha-la. It is the matter of the city, that sense of maha-la, that everybody lives under one roof. Because, roof is a symbol of neighbourhood, of together-ness. But today – it’s utopia, cause people don’t recognise their friends on the street.

(...)

S. R.: It is catastrophic if city eats its nature and environment. (…) We have come too fast from the rural way of life to some pre-urban way of life. We haven’t entered it easily, contin-uously. (...) Well, we have wild urbanism. There is no plan. Illegal building is a noose around

Sarajevo’s neck, and for its prevention there has to be professional and political will. I wonder what are all those regulatory plans for. They are legally founded, but in practice something com-pletely different occurs. How can someone get electricity, gas, water and other urban benefits, for a non-existing building? We constantly have repairs because they are building on unstable ground, or protected zones and all the planned funds for infrastructure go for these repairs of private investments. I think that social policy has to be separated from the investment poli-cy… According to some estimates, two yearly budgets of The Canton of Sarajevo are needed for reparation of illegal construction.

S. R.: That’s why I propose educating the citizens through a manual for urbanism, which would create better conditions for living and working in this city. It would help the experts from the field of urbanism, but also the broad public, local authorities, each citizen… it should be written in the form of guidelines, understanda-ble and legible. It should show how urban order could be brought in a city.

114

DICTATORSHIP OF CONSUMPTION

15. SERVICES AND GOODS: to a wild range of accessible services and goods, of adequate quality, provided by the local authority, the private sector or by partnership between both.


The chairman of the police syndicate of The Can-

ton of Sarajevo Nedžib Djozo said today that the

boots and shoes provided by the former Minster

of Internal Affairs of The Canton for 1.300 Sa-

rajevan policemen, at the cost of 160.000 KM,

do not meet police standards. Djozo said at the

press conference that he suspects that there

are elements of fraud and abuse of authority in

this procurement. He added that a number of

policemen took those shoes, but they returned

them quickly because they had leaked in the

rain, or their heels had fallen off. “These shoes

are for single use. They bury people in such

shoes in the West. We suspect that they have

been imported from China, and it is possible

that they can even cause cancer.”

(Source: Tuzlanski.ba)

BUSINESS IN VAIN

A. T.: Many of those buildings in Marind-vor I see as futile investments. I mean those shopping malls. On the other hand, when the authorities are trying to justify those buildings, they say that the city will benefit from them, government will benefit, I don’t know what else. I see them as cheap tricks to create an illu-sion of a better life. I don’t think that any shop-ping mall here will be profitable very soon. In order for them to be profitable a huge amount of money has to be spent in them every day. And there is no such amount of money here. They even look bad, most of them. Simply, they are a part of the transition from socialism to capitalism and they are a reflexion of the pri-mary accumulation of capital.

115

WE NEED MUCH LESS

N. N. Č.: I think that the system we live in to-day, offers an illusion of endless possibilities to people. Then it becomes a model both for those who can and those who can’t achieve it. During the war, when it is about mere survival, not only in Sarajevo, or in this last war, creativity becomes very important. I don’t know if that is some sort of resistance, the human… On the other hand, I think at least, it’s a state of free-dom of acting, with no limitations and models, how it should be or what it should be. Thus, I believe that many people found then space for their free acting… And doesn’t that wit and cre-ativity show us that we, in fact, need much less?

N. N. Č.: My goal is to live in a society with different relationships between people, with different values, with different choices, with choices in their true meaning, not the choices offered here, like when you enter a shopping mall and you can choose… Why do you need to have the same shop in five different loca-tions in the city? Therefore, a person needs much less than we think.

X: … You don’t need 15 different toothpastes… Why would you need them? If the one you have is OK. You don’t need 15 different soaps. It’s like choosing your brand, an illusionary choice. You don’t need that illusion of luxury…

N. N. Č.: Most of the people accept this way of life, because they don’t have an alternative. Many times I think how comfortable we’ve be-come in the sense that everything has to be the way we imagine. We are nervous because we can’t buy something on Sunday, and we used to live for years with all the shops closed on Sun-days, or that we won’t be able to get in front of the front door with our car. Everything is possi-ble in another way.

116

MEANS OF POOR DISTRIBUTION

16. NATURAL WEALTH AND RESOURCES: to the management and husbanding of local resources and assets by a local authority in a rational, careful, efficient and equitable manner for the benefit of all citizens.


According to the data of The World Bank for

2012, Bosnia and Herzegovina is the country

with the highest amount of drinking water per

citizen, in this region… With 9.461 cubic me-

tres per citizen, B&H is the first in the region

and the seventh in Europe. B&H has more

water resources than many other countries

such as China, France, Germany, Japan and

USA. Muriz Spahić, professor at The Faculty

of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, said

that B&H should be much more focused on

export and distribution of water to the coun-

tries which have water deficit.

(Source: Limun.hr)

Around 43% of the territory of B&H is cov-

ered in forests, or almost half of this coun-

try is “green”. For a comparison, Bosnia and

Herzegovina has forests twice as Belgium,

three times more than Denmark, and almost

four times more than Great Britain. B&H is the

first in The Balkans and the seventh in Europe

in forest resources. (…) However, forests in

B&H are used irrationally and with no system.

In many parts of the country we have ille-

gal cutting down. “In Canton Sarajevo alone

there are more than a hundred illegal plac-

es for cutting down trees. Also, it is official

that during the last year around 10.000 cu-

bic metres of wood was cut down illegally in

The Canton of Sarajevo. But, I think that this

number is triple. If illegal cutting continues,

the forests will reduce, which will cause the

reduction of water, and a bigger number of

insects and fungal diseases, etc.”

(Source: Slobodna-bosna.ba)

117

TO WHOM BELONGS THE WATER?

S. A.: Water is a general problem. If you’ve seen Bjelašnica… it’s like a settlement, but it’s not… by style, by density, by numbers. Of course, then we have that shit, excuse me, coming down from there, from the mountain, to the river Bosnia, and polluting it, while half of Sarajevo drinks water from that source. That’s why I’m a pessimist – the further we go more pessimistic I become. My pessimism becomes confirmed. You can possibly correct one house, but you can’t Bjelašnica. It is done, no way we can save anything…

LAND IN THE CITY BELONGS TO ALL OF US

N. Č.: We are talking about the transition be-tween two systems, from social ownership to-ward private ownership. It’s a new cycle, some-thing we had known during Austro-Hungarian period. Before that, during the Ottoman period, the city land belonged to everybody. Then it belonged to individuals, then in socialism to all again, and now again to individuals. The ques-tion is how private interest profits? It profits by taking away from the social. It’s hard to profit on your own private property. So, I can build a thousand square metres on my private land, but I can go very high and thus have ten thousand. That’s already public space, because I’m taking away the sun, the wind, the view. The public space has been breached. Then I take some more land to expand and that is the practice in Marindvor. Then, even the House of Culture Hrasno, the local community’s administration building… it’s a bar. It’s one of the most beau-tiful local community buildings, with the most beautiful view in town, made for all of us. It’s been sold and a restaurant is there now. There is the Pioneer Centre, that was sold too, but the ownership is not legally solved, and so now it just stands there like that… kindergartens have become embassies.

X: Yes, the most beautiful ones.

N. Č.: In socialism the most beautiful build-ings were given to children, but then the most

beautiful buildings were given to some guests, embassies. That’s OK. But even a guest knows when it’s enough. So, the public space is viewed as the space for manipulation. Private interests profit from it. That is evident, growing, doesn’t slow down.

X: And after that, how to regulate some social utopia, which is not selfish?

N. Č.: It’s about making a decision. The City of Barcelona buys the city land on daily basis and turns it into social land. In Stockholm, 50% of the city land is social, because they are buying it off all the time. Therefore, when society owns the land – and Sarajevo used to be like that, or any other Yugoslav or Bosnian city – that is a real fundament for development. That is the philosophy of the socialist system – city land belongs to all of us, and that is a secure basis for quality development.

Y: What is the situation like in Sarajevo now?

N. Č.: Bad. You’ll probably hear from the actual politicians or those from the shadow who run things: this is not communism anymore, that time has gone. They refuse that time either un-der orders, or with the goal of achieving some-thing else. Because, why should we buy off the land if we don’t know what to do with it?

Y: It looks that this whole project deals with the lack of that public benefit.

N. Č.: It deals with vanishing. It vanishes, be-cause public benefit is a public investment.

N. Č.: Now, we are coming back to that land. I think it’s that simple. If I don’t have money to build a house, or a park, and the land is mine, I’ll just reserve it. But instead of keep-ing that land for some economic moment, I could think like this… That land, which is planned for some cultural activity, I will give to a religious institution. Thus, we see religion as culture. We could. But, that was not in the plan. And then, instead of building a House of

118

Culture, or a library, I’ll build a temple. And that is the practice.

N. Č.: Even without building, it is a value, a re-source for future.

N. Č.: There are mechanisms to turn all that back to the starting point. But we don’t use those. I’m talking about illegal building. For ex-ample, Marindvor is all illegal building. They’ve legalised it eventually, but if you read the urban plan, it is factually illegal… The framework for this city is that you cannot obstruct the view of the skyline. Where nature, mountains and the sky connect. It means we cannot build tall buildings. A tall building is a barrier for the airflow in Sarajevo, which lies in a basin. Thus, there are frameworks and recommendations de-fining this space. That is being breached. Why? Because it prevents individual profit.

X: Those frameworks, regulations… except the right to a view… is there something else?

N. Č.: Of course there is. It’s called urbanistic conditions. It’s about density, or the coefficient of building, those are numerical values defining physical structure. Of course you can profit more if you erase those regulations, but nobody gave us a task to profit more. We are asked to profit equally, as a community. It’s been written.

X: When was it written?

N. Č.: In 1986. There were some changes in ’91 and then in ’95, but it’s still there. Maybe it’s been lost, I’d have to check, but even if it’s lost it tells us about the actual development. Why is it lost?

119

CONDITIONAL FREEDOM

17. PERSONAL FULFILLEMENT: to urban conditions conductive to the achievement of personal well-being and individual social, cultural, moral and spiritual development.


(…) During the period from 2006 until 2012

at least 150.000 young people left B&H, who

moved to the countries of Western Europe,

North America and Australia, looking for a

better life. The number is not reducing, but

opposite – it is rising. That is shown by the

fact that in a similar research in 2004 around

62% of people in the age between 15 and 30

said they would like to leave B&H forever. In

2007 that number increased to 77%, while,

according to the latest research, in 2012 that

number was 81%. (…)

(Source: Studomat.ba)

STIMULANT

N. N. Č.: Some new values should be offered, models of choices. I think that there are many people, not only in this town, but probably everywhere, who are simply talented for some-thing, and who can never realise their potential. To use a popular term, we could maybe call whole-life education, but maybe I don’t know well about that whole concept. Some cen-tres, which would be workshops for drawing, dancing, fun, making some stuff, but not only for students and young people, but also for middle-aged people, who would participate… those who never had a chance to be educated…

for citizens. Most of people in this world live through their lives without discovering their specific talents, and I really think that discover-ing those talents leads to happier people. When I say different relationships, I mean that we should have a less violent society, i. e. to stim-ulate what’s good inside the people. Because, if somebody is happier individually, they will be better toward their surrounding. Maybe that seems too idealistic, but I simply think that it is very hard to create different relationship be-tween people, if no new models are structurally offered, which would develop human potential, make them happy and give them a bigger vari-ety of real possibilities. The notion freedom of choice is so often used today, and the choices we have are monotonous.

SPACE OF NON-FREEDOM

F. Š.: One of my personal utopias regarding Sarajevo would be that the work you do is not stigmatised. That people live, not in harmony, not that everybody should hug and kiss, you know, I don’t need any respect for what I do best, literature.

X: And how big is the individual potential for self-correction? Emancipation?

120

F. Š.: I think that Sarajevo is one of the toughest cities to live in, regarding that. I mean for that kind of emancipation, artistic, or any other kind. I feel deep inside that I still write under self-censorship. It’s not bad that self-censor-ship… but I simply feel I won’t be understood. I’m not saying I’m a genius, and that nobody will understand me. They would, I write in the language they understand… But, every writer is a manipulator, if you want… But, if you write simply and precisely and see that somebody still doesn’t understand, or interprets that in a wrong way, for millions of reasons – what about literature then? What about something you’ve worked on for six-seven years, constructing something positive? Therefore, I’d rather talk more about the space of non-freedom. So, here you have to be King Kong in anything. I’m not talking about vanity. You have to be strong, so strong to be able to speak about anything, to be able to write, to work, and then that people read that in large numbers. And even that cannot liberate you.

F. Š.: If you are alone… that essential loneli-ness… you have some friends… but it’s not freedom. You have the support. It’s all great, you travel all the time, you’ve crossed language borders and you become owned by somebody… I don’t know… by people from Germany. There are lots of things, but essentially I think that Sa-rajevo is, in that cultural sense, in big regression.

F. Š.: Like those idiots said that new narrations should be invented. There are no new narra-tions. You understand? If I tackled everything in my poetry – and I did – what to do now? I won’t write all the time about… beggars, crip-pled people, whose stubs are a metaphor for the world in which we live in (quoting myself). You become exhausted. You cannot write about poor people all the time, about capitalism, about classes. Even if you order someone – make a public contest, let’s say: write a novel about new Bosnian elite. Those 5%, it’s boring… I’m not interested. I don’t want even to see that part, it’s my blind spot.

EMOTIONALLY INCAPABLE

When I speak about current possibilities of civilisation, possibilities of our knowledge, I can see that we have abandoned body, more or less, but we haven’t yet entered the spiritual phase, let alone soul. In order for a half-primitive man to rule, for him it’s enough to establish borders, his territory is a confined system. Today, con-temporary computer systems… Facebook, for example, it’s so open, that it’s an uncontrolled chaos in which you are dragged from different positions. There are still no programmes which would open, only those which close systems, in order for a man to understand… A part of our brain is made of memories, and a man remem-bers only through emotions, emotional experi-ence. When you read any newspaper, or when you surf through The Web, it’s just burdening your brain with myriad of information, with no emotions involved. It means, brain is adapted to that fast and simple collection of keywords and sentences.

S. R.: People speak of love superficially. Why superficially? Love is not a usability. In love you give, and give and never expect anything in return. You can’t say – wooah, I’ve been stupid, I’ve fallen in love and wasted time. You can’t say that. But, for example, marriage is a civilization-al form, a social institution. It’s not just like that, for reproduction, it’s there for overcoming prob-lems. You can’t solve a problem materially or financially. Problems are much more profound. Caring for someone else is above all financial limitations. If someone needs help. Those were socialist utopias, which are now on some auxil-iary rails, getting cold…

Y: ... or maybe getting warmed up again?

VULNERABILITY AS A FEATURE

X: What would be, in your opinion a utopia of morality?

N. N. Č.: Within my research, on a higher theo-retical level, I simply want to register the limits of speech. For instance, we can’t say now that

121

there was no war, people talk about the war all the time. The question is in what way they talk about it, and how many individuals can find a parallel with their own experience in that. And, how much that discourse, which exists, helps them, or doesn’t, to articulate that. So, today, sev-enteen years after, everybody has a generalised way to articulate that. However, it is very hard, and it becomes a point of trauma. Well, some au-thors have said that, in fact, vulnerability, which is so much spread, should be recognised as a human feature. If we took vulnerability, instead of some other much more aggressive features, as human feature, it would totally turn whole moral system upside down… that would be good.

N. N. Č.: What I know is that this way is not good. I think that the limits of speech can be moved, but in order to move them we need a surrounding which supports it, a society which opens taboo themes. I think we should work on that and that there are things happening in those regards. Well now, how strong they are, how powerful, that is another question. Proba-bly in synergy with some other things, artistic, or some others, they could make changes. That will probably not happen during our lifetimes, but I really believe that changes are possible.

X: Changes will happen during our lifetimes, but the question is, on the other hand, what is normal. New psychology will declare asocial or choosy people as… socially non-functional, which is catastrophic.

N. N. Č.: Yes.

X: It means if you are shy, or not really too so-cial, you are not socially functional. Then, we should all aspire to participate in reality shows.

TO HAVE A VISION OF WHAT YOU WANT

N. K.: You can make some things happen, but you have to try real hard, you have to fight, you have to have that cool mentality, which existed here during the war, but after it’s been narrowed down, probably because the enemy is abstract,

or less concrete. In order to engage in such a fight, you need to have a vision of what you want. It doesn’t have to be an enemy, it can be a project. Your enemy is the administration, stupidity, corruption, which will racket you if you want to realise something. Both physical and spiritual spaces exist for action, and why people don’t act anymore… I know that there is an apathy. I remember Susan Sontag, who said – I paraphrase now – that apathy is very often a suppressed trauma. Like, I need to draw the world around me much worse than it is in order to justify my lack of action.

WHO ‘PUSHES’, WINS

S. K.: I’ve never said the word utopia in my life. This is the first time here, with you. I also thought that a man and a woman are no differ-ent. That was obviously a mistake. But, I suppose that everything I’ve done since ’92 could have been called utopia at its starting point. Today, when you see those projects realised, you see that it was possible. And, if somebody laid me down on a couch, they would maybe realise that I’ve always talked about something that would be unachievable for others. I don’t know if you will compare the word utopia with the word un-achievability... maybe you can only achieve something if you don’t see its un-achievability. I’ve got a computer programmer I collaborate with, and whenever I demand something from him to make in the virtual world, he says: That will be invented maybe in five years. But, it will be invented. So, I have a capability to predict what will be. But mainly, when I ask for it, then it’s unachievable. Fortunately, due to my bad character, I never give up. So I wait for the mo-ment for it to happen.

122

LOCOCENTRISM18. INTER-MUNICIPAL COLLABORATION: in which citizens are free and encouraged to participate directly in the international relations of their community.


We would like to inform the public on the de-

cision by The Municipal Court in Sarajevo,

which found guilty Lejla Šeper and Darjan

Bilić of disturbing the public order. They were

given contempt and have to pay the trial ex-

penses, for removing illegally put election

campaign posters by different political par-

ties, SDA among others, whose candidate

was Koldžo Nedžad, who is still the Mayor of

the municipality Novo Sarajevo.

(Source: Akcija građana / Citizens Action)

RIGHT TO THE SAME SPACE

A. H.: Public space is always utopia, even in those societies, which are open, we know that there is a camera somewhere, and that at least the guy from the store watches you. Maybe, that is the point of public space. The problem is when you don’t see those who are watching you, who sit in some room, watching you on a screen. Politeness comes out of that when peo-ple come to a public place they behave towards each other according to some rules. At the mo-ment that disappears, anything is possible.

X: Do we have norms of behaviour?

A. H.: Norms always exist, but the one who dominates the public spaces determines those norms. The question is how much do we agree with them.

S. K.: The question is whether you can introduce ideological prejudice, or some other emotion, into some building, or space? Why can’t I use the BBI Centre? Because the space there is marked. There is a praying room there, or there isn’t one… you can drink alcohol or you can’t… That way that space has lost it’s main purpose. Emo-tions toward a building? Like we live in some most horrible dictatorship… And our trauma is that they could rule. It comes out of the projec-tion of the past, present and future. I think that shouldn’t happen. Because if we are doing it, as a, let’s say, a more positive side of the city and the world, then they will be much worse. It means, we should have the right to that same space.

X: Those are prejudices, which circle around and extend with each new situation.

123

S. K.: Like Montenegrins, they have the whites and the greens. And when you walk a street they say, these bars are for the whites, and these are for the greens. They’re divided everywhere. If you are the green, no way you could enter the white bar, there is an incident immediately. That’s the same thing like with the BBI. There is a street of gold digger girls: very nice, restau-rants, bars. I sat there, don’t know the history, and a friend of mine said: I’ll never set a foot there. – Why? – Gold digger girls are there. I didn’t know about… gold digger girls. I don’t know if it is like that in other cities, but here it obviously plays a role.

S. K.: Processes have to be parallel. If they are stronger – and they always are stronger than us – Al Qaida plans to tear down the towers, and they do it. Let us try and make a positive effect that we plan in New York. We can’t do it, and they succeeded in tearing down two sky-scrapers from a cave. They always have the ad-vantage. They know how to do it. And we have to contribute on our side, somehow. If we stop, there will be only them. That’s what I think, it doesn’t have to be correct. What do you say? Do you follow?

OPENING

N. N. Č.: That trend of idealising the past, or I don’t know how to call it, it actually fills the space where the imagination of something new should appear. I think we should open up toward the world, that we should know more about the world, especially the distant parts of the world. So, not to have again one model. We cannot find anywhere a model, which you can copy-paste here. But, we insist too much on how specific we are. Generally, I think that it is important to look for differences – but I think we have come to the point where we complete-ly overlook the similarities with some world, which we don’t see as relevant, because, oh my God, we had a different, specific socialism, then we had the war, and now everything is specific in the way the state is organised, and so on. But, somehow all the time we push toward some

holistic approach, to find a complete model. Maybe anthropology has helped me in the sense of reducing my objectives and look for some smaller things…

DEMANDING OPTICS

N. K.: One can notice improvements in our hamlet, but one needs demanding optics to see them. I won’t say you need a microscope, but a magnifying glass… Things will get better, I’m sure. Not because I believe in spirit, in miracle of Bosnian resistance, but because we are ge-ographically located in a spot which, whether we want that or not, pushes toward European Union and simply because we are a grey zone in different respects – security, religious and many other – and a grey zone is always something that needs to be changed. (…) So, it exists as a tendency, to drag the whole region into Europe-an Union, even as B-, C-, or D-countries.

B&H ADMINISTRATIVE CENTRE OF EU

Z. Ć.: I would just turn the situation upside down. We have enough space, and we agreed to become… the administrative centre of Europe-an Union… we would solve the problem.

Z. Ć.: I was proposing that, to offer European Union that we become the administrative cen-tre, the whole Bosnia and Herzegovina. Anyway, 70% of us work in administration, this way we could all. So when they need an ID card they come here.

X: And we are not a part of European Union?

Z. Ć.: We are the administrative centre.

X: We are just the centre, we service them, but we never enter the Union?

Z. Ć.: No need for that. They pay us, come to us, here they get new ID cards… all roads fixed, fuck it. Lots of parking space.

Y: Are you talking about utopia?

124

FISCAL ENCLOSURE19. FINANCIAL MECHANISMS AND STRUCTURES: enabling local authorities to find the financial resources necessary for the exercise of the rights as defined in this Declaration.


Public servants, according to the latest report,

in the last year alone spent 18,5 million Marks

for new vehicles, registrations, insurance, fuel,

maintenance, washing and parking. (…) A foot-

ball stadium would not be enough to park all of

their official cars, and there are around 3.500

of them, with the value of 25 million Marks. Be-

sides that our politicians and public servants

spend huge amounts of money on taxi and

rent a car. Thus, according to a research, the

amount of money they spent in one year for

taxi was enough for them to circle the globe

25 times. And all that in the country whose

citizens are the poorest in region. (…) Accord-

ing to some estimates one in five citizens of

Bosnia and Herzegovina lives on 3KM a day,

and 20.000 of them eat at least once a day in

the public kitchen. (…) “As long as the leading

people in those institutions, ministers, direc-

tors, etc. do not suffer any consequences, the

situation will remain the same. And when just

one of them is found responsible morally and

politically, I think it will be the beginning of

the end of this story”, people from the NGO

Centre For Civil Initiatives said. (…)

(Source: Tuzlanski.ba)

TOOLS FOR CHANGE

X: How do you see the urban development in Sarajevo? Is it uncontrolled, or?

N. Č.: I think that the word horrible describes it much better. This what is happening, not only in Sarajevo, is uncontrolled, meaning it is not

according to the plans. That is a very simple definition, but there is a trick to adapt plans, and then eventually we say that it’s been planned like that. When I talk with the experts (that is also an odd surrounding) I see there is a group of people who will say that such development since 1992 until today, hasn’t been justified. But also, there is another group supporting it, because either they don’t have criteria, or they have criteria. I have to admit that I don’t understand them, it confuses me that there are my colleagues, who think that such devel-opment is acceptable to an extent. First you have something which is torn down, as an idea, then they build something over that, which is uncontrolled, or horrible. So, complexity of the problem is still on the rise. Parallel to that, I’m thinking of some future, and nothing points to be built or decided towards that future. Our urban plans are, so to say, fantastic. They contain an explicit direction toward a justified development, for beautiful development, for development of space and man, but they are not realised the way they’ve been conceived. Then you start thinking. You’re thinking about some points, instead of the system, because the sys-tem is obviously too complex, too strong and it doesn’t show any justifiable directions of devel-opment, which are good in the broadest sense.

N. Č.: So, what to do? Whether not to think about the system, or to think about the system less, or to maximally engage in your work, and I think that is the answer. There is a possibility to produce quality from the sum of small points,

125

either organised, or not, doesn’t matter. So, how to act? At this moment one should act according to individual criteria and do what one believes in, with arguments, which confirm that belief and to hope that eventually the sum of those repeated good things would result in quality. It is theoretically possible, but I’m not sure if it is achievable in our case.

N. Č.: But now, I have to admit I’ve become tired. And I have a thesis that is on the long run exhausting to project or think about the future with the situation like it is, with this heritage, with peace-time mechanisms. And so on, it all looks like a planning or urbanistic heresy, but I cannot still accept that I, as a pos-sible urban planner, am expected to participate in creating future using some everyday tools. If I’m given, as a base, something created using some dreadful tools, I also want such strong tools in order to make a change. (…) And then I said that there was no hope, no sense. Does that mean that nothing exists anymore? No it doesn’t. But hope is… used up. But, thanks for that question… maybe those points… some-thing could be done.

N. Č.: (...) In 1997 there was an academic work-shop in Munich, it was called Visions For The Future. It was related to Sarajevo. There were around fifty students and five teachers. It was a terrible moment, just after the war. I won’t be long, I’ll only conclude. All participants from Sarajevo refused the title Vision For Sarajevo, they refused visionary thinking, deeming that it couldn’t be like that, because there is something which is current, something we already had, and it had been torn down, and it had to be rebuilt.

N. Č.: Then, possibilities were much better, because it was still hot situation, it could have been remodelled.

N. Č.: Is this the time for visions? It is, always. By definition visions are not realistic, but in themselves they surely carry the essence of the wanted reality, the meaning of future and the city and living… Visions are precondition, but

we lack strength, tools, mass and more belief. The practice simply discourages… And we are looking for an inspiration, motivation.

URBAN PLAN IS UTOPIA

N. Č.: Marindvor is a space which was under-developed, partly abandoned. But it was like that because of the care for future of that space, having in mind its importance. Regulation plan explicitly speaks of it as the link between – as they call it – urban tissue, between Aus-tro-Hungarian heritage and modern heritage. So, we are talking about, I don’t know, maybe 15 public contests in the past. There has never been the first prize. There was always some-thing lacking for the best solution, the wanted solution. And, I think, that only just before the war the colleague Polić received the second prize and that was the project that should have been realised. I’ve seen some notes from the seventies and the eighties regarding Marind-vor, and I was ashamed when I saw with how much dedication and seriousness they were approaching development of a space, opposed to now, when decisions are quickly made.

N. Č.: Now, at each public discussion – each urban plan has a public discussion – each cit-izen’s vote, which could lead to an extension of the plan or decision making, doesn’t matter

126

if it is affirmative or negative, is commented like: You are against development, and those comments always come from some last row of the audience. It is indicative to me, because to haste something opens up the possibility of making mistakes. Well, now we have The Plan-ning Institute, which, it is proven and written, tries to preserve the city, in the sense of its development according to the plans. But they have such mechanisms that they can preserve some 10% of that preservation. The other part they can’t, because they are under constant threat if they don’t produce a plan, and so on. Therefore, the proposal and the project of development were made under pressure, the pressure of profit. Consequentially, the urban plan is utopia.

N. Č.: Economy doesn’t see far. The base for development is space. If you don’t have any, you won’t be able to have any economy, and if you do you’ll have it when you can. That’s why there is this big fight around the land for The Concert Hall, as much as I don’t agree always with a pro-ject or its contents. Has that land fallen? I don’t know exactly, but I know that there is continu-ous pressure for that land to change its purpose, to be bought off, and to build something which is not according to the regulatory plan, but to somebody’s individual interest.

WHEN THE CITY BECOMES SOCIAL CATEGORY

N. Č.: Our utopia existed. It had its weaknesses and its strengths, like any other utopia. But, it was our utopia. And it was a reality people ex-perienced in a way. But now in discussions, you can recognise that significant elements of that past are still utopia, and they need to be pro-duced. I say produced, because I think it is much more acceptable than to say return, people are retreating from that. What are you doing – re-turning to socialism? We are not returning to socialism, we are going forward to socialism.

N. Č.: For example, the past experiences of lo-cal communities were good… Everybody knew then, depending on their age, their range, where

the other gang is, where he will be beaten up, where he can be secure, whom he knows less. I don’t think that people have changed that much to look for some other type of community.

N. Č.: The whole Europe, and the entire capi-talism, are practically moving towards a type of socialism. It is evident. But, it’s not the socialism we know. It’s another socialism.

N. Č.: And, of course, economy has to change its nature completely. The West sees democracy as an integral part of the free economy. Therefore, those two have to go together. The free econo-my is destructive by itself, by its definition it is selfish and short-term and oriented exclusively toward profit. That is why we have distinguished people in Europe, who are saying now: economy cannot be measure of all things. With this soci-ety here, with this kind of economy, I have no capacity to create a vision, a future. Because, in such a system I don’t make decisions, economy does. And that economy is material. People make the economy. It is a number of people, who see the city as an economic category. When city becomes a social category, in fact when we decide it is like that, then there is a base for us to believe that we’ll create something which is a surrounding, a city, an idea, which makes a man happy. Probably not too happy, because of the system, something always has to be wrong.

X: How much a physical structure can partici-pate in utopia?

N. Č.: It cannot at all, until we define utopia.

X: Aha, until we set our goal…

N. Č.: Of course. By its definition utopia is something unachievable, but we need to de-scribe that unachievable in order to go toward there. There is a nice Seneca’s sentence: If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favourable. It’s like that. We have to know which port we are going to, what is our utopia. Then we will choose the wind.

127

MIXED-UP IN IDENTITY20. EQUALITY: where local authorities ensure that the above rights apply to all citizens, irrespective of sex, age, origin, belief, social, economic or political position, physical or psychological handicap.


On Thursday, 19th of April, 2012, a voluntary

blood donating was organised at The Faculty

of Philosophy in Sarajevo, and before the very

donation the students had to fill up a form of

The Institute For Transfusion Medicine of B&H.

In the part “Persons That Shouldn’t Donate

Blood” it said “persons who have occasional

or continual sexual relationship with homosex-

uals”, which made three students angry. The

students Lamija Topčagić, Nedžmina Šeta and

Amar Numanović addressed the Dean’s office

and pointed out the discriminatory sentence in

the form. They were told that the faculty was

not responsible for the contents of the form,

and the students started warning others about

the discriminatory form, which is opposed to

basic human rights. After that, one of the med-

ical technicians physically attacked Amar Nu-

manović, and the librarian from the faculty got

involved also, calling the students “junkies”

and “failed students”. The arguable rule, for-

bidding persons of homosexual orientation to

donate blood, exists in most of the European

countries, and The Great Britain decided half a

year ago to make a step forward, to introduce

the condition that there was no homosexual

contact for at least 12 months. It is obvious

that this is discriminatory and obsolete prac-

tice, dating back from the eighties, because

persons with risky sexual relationships obvi-

ously exist among heterosexuals as much as

among homosexuals.

(Izvor: Danas.net.hr)

FREED FROM EVERYTHING

S. M.: I would simply like when I stroll down Ferhadija Street and if somebody shouts: Milan!, that half of the people don’t turn around to see who is that Milan. The same utopia like when you stroll down Knez Mihajlo Street in Belgrade and you shout Muhamed! That nobody turns around. It is simply that register. I’m not saying that fascism exists, but if we could be…

128

X: ... freed from those prejudices.

S. M.: Freed from anything, you know. That, when those six Hare Krishna pass by with their instruments, five-six grandmas don’t say Oh my dear God, what is this? That is utopia to me. To be freed from ourselves, and prejudice.

X: In fact, to you utopia would be a society where politeness is an acceptable convention.

S. M.: And, in fact, I would introduce there a basic principle of human rights: that my rights stop where you rights begin. That only that one sentence exists, that a set of basic politeness ex-ists. So, I don’t want to be upset by the existence of the other and different. It is a complete defeat for me, I think that urbs dies there.

X: Yes, it is interesting to talk about human rights as a utopia.

Z: I’m interested… how is it possible to realise them?

S. M.: Human rights?

S. M.: There is a quasi-formula. It is about ed-ucation. A huge problem in our education sys-tem that we have the educational component emphasised very much, but there is no raising component. The problem is that the human rights are taught in schools like the Catholic Church dogma, as catechesis. You have to learn a book by heart, and then they ask you from it at the end of the year, to get some grade. Culture of human rights is something that needs to be taught for all eight years, not as some convention, declaration, protocol, law, some instrument that obliges you to do some-thing, or otherwise you will be sanctioned. You know it sounds better in English free as freedom. That is hardest to achieve – personal freedom. You can take a rifle and free some-thing. That’s ok, but to free yourself is a hell of a job. It’s horrible.

EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO MOVE AND TO BE A CRETIN

S.M.: I really like graffiti I saw, that best pictures our situation. It was in Oslobodjenje newspaper a couple of years ago, on The Day of Human Rights and it says: Everybody Has The Right To Move And To Be A Cretin. It shows perfectly the situation of human rights, which always come in active-passive form – everybody has the right to vote and to be voted for. Everybody has the right to move and to be a cretin is indeed untranslatable.

DECODED IDENTITIES

S. M.: If you speak of identity and the con-struction of identity and its transformation, we firstly have to admit ourselves, and that is the hardest: when we speak of identity, we speak of some dominant identity. And somehow we always forget that inside us there is a multiple co-habitation of identities. Not one, but 59. That is the minimum. And, when we speak of one, we identify ourselves too much with it, like it’s our primary identity. I think that primary iden-tities don’t exist, but the ones in co-habitation. And, in fact, a situation draws one of those to the surface. I like to reduce that to literary char-acters. We should simply realise that inside us there are at least five dominant identities, which are not ultimately catholic, orthodox, Jewish, Serbo-Croatian, Bosniac… but inside each of us there is Prometheus and Hamlet and Nora and Melquiades. We are Prometheus, we give some flame, and then lament chained to some rock – why did I need this? Road to hell… We pity ourselves often – it’s a Prometheus’s identity. We also have Nora: to live somewhere else, where you feel better with somebody else, to do some-thing, which is your need, and for what you will be judged by the community. And, we also have the right to be Hamlet, to, for the sake of some higher goal, those small, personal desires mask into that famous sentence To be or not to be, that is the question. And the most dominant is the one we abuse mostly, that’s Melquiades, an illu-sion. Somehow I think that we live an illusion too much. We are masters of illusion. It is the

129

story of denial – when you talk to your friends, nobody has problem with alcohol, nobody’s dad is nervous, nobody’s mom is evil, we’re all happy. We have enough money. You’ll never admit you don’t have enough money, but rather you’ll say you forgot your credit card, that you couldn’t make it to the bank, and simply you don’t have any money. You won’t say I can’t go to a bar to-night, because I don’t have money, but because I have a flu. I’ve talked a lot with the people who survived concentration camps. They had been frozen with one identity for a long time – to be a camp survivor. They needed a long time to re-alise that they were former camp survivors. So, he is not in the camp now. In the spatial world he is a father, a grandfather, an employee, a crea-tive worker. We live one identity and struggle to keep it. And simply, we in The Balkans like to be victims. The Balkans is the biggest victimologi-cal society that there is.

S. M.: My, maybe most dominant identity is – librarian, somebody who is the middleman for knowledge. Then come all the others: to be a fa-ther is simply a function you perform for maybe four hours a day, to be a friend is two hours a day… In fact, those identities are not present all the time.

S. M.: We are talking about the capability of the human animal… to adapt. And I think that here we have given up that mechanism of adaptability.

WITHOUT MANIPULATION

F. Š.: Maybe the global phenomenon is that there is no honesty, justice… I’ve written so much, I’ve been interested so much in that so-cial justice… I haven’t constructed that… and then people ask me How did you see that? Other people don’t see that.

X: What concretely?

F. Š.: The social image, poverty. I’ve had that hy-per humanistic idea, that literature will save the world, I mean words, ethics, above all… I used to be a radical leftist, non-national, whatever

that means. I had that desire to overcome na-tional norms, divisions. Of course, you pass that phase, but something remains. You can see that in literature and in what you do, but how to live alone…

X: It means, you have to identify with some collective?

F. Š.: No, not me. But if you have an idea… of course you want to spread it… after a while we’ll get bored. We are changing the world, while sitting in the same chair all the time. Let’s go out on the street, let’s do something.

Y: How to change it, not to be political?

F. Š.: We are reaching a certain age, forties and something… things change in both directions, good and bad. You cannot be rebellious in same way all the time. I know those leftists, they’re trying so much to be so… cool. They read those theoreticians that I used to read too. I got bored with it… I was with a guy once, he doesn’t do anything, just lives, and we went to a bar near Centrotrans behind Markale. And there were some workers there, huge people, having beers. I was into new Marxism then… and at certain point, I was totally angry with the government, and became somehow dominant in that space. Then I told them You are workers, why did you

130

vote for them? I was showing them… I was in the war too, what do you want… One of them said Bravo, you’re a king. Immediately, I got supporters. They were hypnotised. Of course, my energy had to drop at one point. I just felt I was not dominating that space anymore… The waitress said something, a taxi driver said something. I started arguing with him. He said Who’s this psycho, holding a speech for two hours?... I was going all around, telling people what I had read, connected… about SDA, Alija, the war… What are you, you’re nothing, you’re not workers, why don’t you fight, why did you vote for the nationalistic parties to get fucked by them. And it went on, until the time came for strategic retrieval. When I see people, who think like that now, it’s ridiculous. I mean you should do it when you are 25 or 30, but later… I don’t want to push anybody into anything, not even into utopia. It is aggressive a bit. Maybe in more subtle ways… with no manipulation.

DIFFERENT (GENDER) RELATIONS

N. N. Č: When I talk about a less violent society, a society without violence, with different rela-tions, I really think that it has some reference points in many societies, it really exists. But, I’ve never thought about a specific society, regarding that. When I say different relations I primarily think of the gender relations.

X: When categorising those changes in relations between humans, is equalisation of gender cate-gories maybe a position for a utopian thinking?

N. N. Č: It is indeed, since none of us has lived in such relations – maybe in Sweden… But, it is very hard to imagine how the world would look like and how life would look like, if we accepted different norms of relations. I think oftentimes that the moral system has to change. But, if I think in advance that something like that is ab-solutely impossible, it will never change.

N. N. Č: We, on one hand, have a problem of determining a word for certain emotion, to verbally express it. On the other hand there is

absence of a real discourse on something… I had an exercise with my students, I wanted to show them how much one influences the oth-er, to question them if they think that if some things had a discourse, that relationship toward them would be different, from sexuality to other subjects. I mention this because, during that exercise, I tried to stimulate them to imagine different relations. And it was so hard, both for them and me. I mean, where to find a reference point? So, maybe imagination should be stimu-lated through media perhaps.

IMAGINE CHOOSING YOUR ANCESTORS

F. Š.: I’ve read Andrić, I like that… but it’s not literature, I like Tolkien more. When Andrić received the Nobel Prize, Tolkien was also nom-inated, but Andrić defeated him by far. But, see who’s on the surface after fifty years. Tolkien is a part of the general, world culture. It’s maybe pop-culture, but what is wrong about pop-cul-ture? Andrić is popular, he’s great, but I don’t want such projection. He’s in the past all the time…

F. Š.: Kiš is my favourite writer, better than all the andrićes and so on. Kiš and Borges… be-cause they have that concept of encyclopaedic dealing with the literature. He is important because he lets you deal with many things from another time. That’s why Aleph exists. Aleph, a point in space and time from which you can see everything at the same time, all the battles are lined up. We’ve never had a well-written history; it has always been on bad fundaments. Firstly, we came of age too late as a nation, as a con-struct. Yugoslavs… For the reasons of empires… this, that, everything… I love Borges, because you need to know how to quote. A quotation has to be necessary for a text in order to…

X: ... be functional…

F. Š.: Borges knows how to do that. He’s made… well, that is one of my time capsules… those things that help me to realise myself. I have his poetry collection called Chosen Poems,

131

published by Serbian Literary Association, Bel-grade, from 1982. I pulled it out of the building of the Railway Station a few days before it was burnt down. There was a man who had his library of Serbian Literary Association there, and… that book was… when I feel bad then I read it. I read it now again. I’ve been reading it for twenty years.

F. Š.: I’m a science fiction writer, a futurist, al-though I write about past. You know, that feeling that you have other ancestors, that you come from another place, that you want to go further.

Within such a context, revolutionary task is not an attempt of immediate execution of revolution – which would be condemned to failure in the beginning – but an attempt to obtain conditions under which a real revolutionary fight can be achieved. Here utopia appears: not as an abstract image of a country, which exists only in one’s mind, nor as the highest level of heaven, where everything is good and finished, but as a telos, which gives a meaning to everyday activities, giving them a purpose.

Paul Piccone, Praxis: Philosophical Magazine, 1-2, 1972.

133

EPILOGUE: AGREEMENT FOR (R)EVOLUTION

N. Č.: There is a question – this is not just my opinion, there are some more voices – if our efforts, and your efforts, in fact, contribute to keeping the situation as it is? Because, they could be a deception regarding our expecta-tions, they could be deceiving us and those who expect changes. In a system good things could be abused and manipulated by the authorities, or private businessmen, to calm us down for a while, to move things… The question is wheth-er to do something, to do nothing? To let the system fall by itself. Otherwise, I enter a huge risk that my positive efforts, wherever they are directed, simply contribute to status quo.

X: I know, it’s risk, but anything is…

N. Č.: Not anything. No. (…) I don’t do any-thing, because I say: this system, the way it is, it has to fall down. Because it doesn’t produce anything. The question is: when will it fall down? How much will our work, which is not obligatory, but like some additional work, in fact extend the situation as it is. Because it is being used as an argument that the authorities, administration, do care, plan, think, involve citi-zens, experts. That is the question.

N. Č.: But, such a decision, not to do anything – can we agree on that? It would be seen as destructive, for sure, to invite people not to do anything, except what they have to do – go to work, to school, kindergarten, factory, mine.

N. Č.: Maybe, that question can be integrated in what you do, to uncover all this. (…) I’m not talking about disobedience, but about surviving and creating.

X: But, you go against yourself…

N. Č.: Well, I don’t know. In a long-term, I expect the system to fail. Therefore, it’s in my favour. I have no base to talk like that, but I’m thinking. A linear change cannot make a shift, here we can only have a revolution. And

revolution is the only instrument that can make things…

X: If we go back to tools as strong as war, then a revolution should be a constructive war.

N. Č.: Then, there had to be a decision on that. I’m not talking about a classical revolution. I’m talking about a new revolution, which is about agreement, a consensus.

X: What shape would that revolution have?

N. Č.: Well now, methods…

X: Anarchistic methods?

N. Č.: No way. We are talking about cyclic changes. It is the matter of time when such time will come. When will that revolution come? (…) This mustn’t be an invitation to a not well-thought changing. Opposite, this is a rational, academic, professional, cultural orien-tation, civilised in everybody’s favour.

X: A revolution, in the sense of drastic change.

N. Č.: Change of quality… A new quality situ-ation cannot emerge out of what we have now, without a revolution. Well, now what instru-ments do we have? The agreement is wider, the instruments are simpler. If there are conflicted parties, then the instruments become danger-ous. And then we need a leader. Otherwise, if it is a matter of agreement, decision, willingness… then we can have a group.

Y: So, it’s already an international group?

N. Č.: It has to be international, because Bosnia And Herzegovina is a product of international and local things. That’s the way it is.

All together: Utopia joint venture.

135

Veoma normalno, veoma normalno je četvrti dio Gradskog registra, serije istraživanja koja su inicirali STEALTH.unlimited, a bave se savremenim razvojem gradova u ze-mljama bivše Jugoslavije i Albanije. Prva edicija Gradskog registra urađena je povodom 4. Internacionalnog bijenala savremene umjetnosti u Tirani (2009). Druga, A(u)kcija – registar novosadskih prostora između ličnih interesa i javnih potreba (2010), sa Cen-trom_kuda.org i saradnicima iz Novog Sada. Treća edicija, Šta je u Pazaru zajedničko? (2012), u saradnji sa Emilom Jurcanom (Pulska grupa) i organizacijom civilnog društva Urban In iz Novog Pazara, u okviru projekta INtoOUTREACH. U formiranju Gradskog registra do sada je svoj doprinos dalo gotovo 75 sagovornika. Gradski registar je pokre-nut u okviru projekta Individualne utopije nekad i sad.

Very normal, very normal is the fourth part of the Cities Log research series, initiated by STEALTH.inlimited and investigating the contemporary development of cities in the region of post-Yugoslavia and Albania. The first edition of the Cities Log has been made on the occasion of the 4th Tirana International Contemporary Arts Biannual (2009). The second edition, A(u)ction – Novi Sad’s Log of Spaces Between Personal Inter-ests and Public Needs (2010), was made with Center_kuda.org and collaborators from Novi Sad. The third edition, What Pazar has in common(s)? (2012), through a collab-oration with Emil Jurcan (Pulska Grupa) and the civil society organisation Urban In from Novi Pazar, within the framework of the project INtoOUTREACH. Nearly 75 conversation partners contributed to the formation of the Cities Log so far. The Cities Log has been initiated through the project Individual Utopia Now and Then.

*

Individualne utopije nekad i sad – Diskontinuitet generacijskog dijaloga ili šta nam je zajedničko? je dugoročni istraživačko-produkcijski projekat multidisciplinarnog i multimedijalnog pristupa koji se fokusira na umjetničke prakse i različite medijske fenomene (pojedinačne, individualne ili grupne, kolektivne) i njihovu percepciju, valorizaciju i uticaj na ukupno iskustvo društva/društava u tranziciji iz perspektive različitih generacija. To je zajednički, partnerski projekat tri organizacije iz Albanije (T.I.C.A, Tirana), Bosne i Hercegovine (SCCA/pro.ba, Sarajevo) i Srbije (Centar_kuda.org, Novi Sad). Društveno-politička slika u ove tri zemlje tek je početna pozi-cija za projekt koji u širem smislu nastoji sagledati prošlo, današnje i buduće stanje zajednice, tranzicijsku transformaciju individualnih i kolektivnih identiteta uopšte, kritički sagledavajući pozicije Balkana u odnosu na Evropu i Zapad i obrnuto.

Individual Utopia Now and Then – Discontinuity of Generation Dialogue or What Do We Have in Common? Is designed as a long term research and produc-tion project with multidisciplinary and multimedia approaches, focused on artis-tic practices and different media phenomena (individual and collective) and their perception, valuation and influence on the experiences of transition societies from perspectives of different generations. The project is made in a partnership between three organisations from Albania (T.I.C.A, Tirana), Bosnia and Herzegovina (SCCA/pro.ba, Sarajevo) and Serbia (Center_kuda.org, Novi Sad). Socio-political images of those three countries are only the starting points for the project, which in a broad sense attempts to encompass past, present and future situations in community, transitional transformations of individual and collective identities in general, critically observing the Balkan’s position towards Europe and vice versa.

www.pro.ba/utopia

*

PICKPAD - Sarajevo 2023 Mašta nas ne smije iznenaditi / Imagination Must Not Catch Us Off Guard Poster dostupan na / poster available at: www.pro.ba/utopia/pickpad

STEALTH.unlimited (arhitekti Ana Džokić i Marc Neelen, Beograd/Roterdam) kroz urbana istraživanja, prostorne intervencije i kulturni ak-tivizam traže mogućnost zajedničkog stvaranja urbanog prostora i kulture. / STEALTH.unlimited (architects Ana Džokić and Marc Neelen, Belgrade/Rotterdam) connect urban research, spatial interventions and cultural ac-tivism – in search for a shared creation of urban space and culture.

Asja Hafner je urednica i koordinator-ka projekata u Centru za savremenu umjetnost (SCCA), Sarajevo i produk-cijskoj kući pro.ba. Autorka koncepta projekta Individualne utopije nekad i sad. / Asja Hafner is editor and project coordinator at Sarajevo Center for Contemporary Art (SCCA) / pro.ba production company. Author of the project concept Individual Utopias Now and Then

Anja Bogojević je članica i kustosica umjetničke produkcije Abart, Mostar. / Anja Bogojević is a member and cura-tor of Abart art production, Mostar.

kuda.org

VEOMA NORMALNO, VEOMA NORMALNOO utopiji urbanih prava/VERY NORMAL, VERY NORMALOn utopia of urban rights

Publikacija istraživanja Gradski registar – Sarajevo, u okviru projekta Individualne utopije nekad i sad – Diskontinuitet generacijskog dijaloga ili šta nam je zajedničko? / Publication of the research Cities Log – Sarajevo, within the project Individual

Utopia Now and Then – Discontinuity of Generation Dialogue or

What Do We Have in Common?

Izdavač / Publisher: SCCA/pro.ba Urednici / Editors: STEALTH.unlimited (Ana Džokić, Marc Neelen), Asja Hafner, Anja Bogojević

Sagovornici / Conversation partners: Stjepan Roš, Nebojša Jovanović, Faruk Šehić, Sabina Ćudić, Nejra Nuna Čengić, Amer Tikveša, Namik Kabil, Slobodan Anđelić, Saša Madacki, Suada Kapić, Adnan Harambašić, Zoran Ćatić, Nihad Čengić.

Želimo im se zahvaliti na trinaest razgovora i mudrih promišljanja u i o Sarajevu – koja čine osnov ove publikacije. / We wish to thank them for thirteen insightful conversations and deliberations in and on Sarajevo – that form the base for this publication.

Pickpad dodatak, poseban doprinos / Pickpad addition, special contribution: Nenad Veličković

Video snimci / Video recordings: Ervin Prašljivić Dizajn i ilustracije / Design and illustrations: Enes Huseinčehajić Fotografije/Photos: Feka Jusović, februar / February 2012

Transkript / Transcript: Ana Hafner Lektura / Proof reading: Kenan Efendić Prevod / Translation: Enes Zlatar

Posebno se zahvaljujemo saradnicima / Special thanks to collaborators: Ervin Prašljivić, Aida Hajro, Ines Latić i savjetnici /and advisor: Dunja Blažević

Štampa / Print: Amos Graf, d.o.o., Sarajevo Izdanje / Edition: maj / May 2013 Tiraž / Circulation: 500 primjeraka /copies

Projekat su podržali: Švajcarski kulturni program za Zapadni Balkan, Fond Otvoreno društvo Bosna i Hercegovina, Evropska kulturna fondacija i ERSTE StiftungProject supported by: the Swiss Cultural Program in the Western Balkans, the Open Society Fund Bosnia and Herzegovina, the European Cultural Foundation and the ERSTE Stiftung

Very normal, very normal or On utopia of urban rights is an exploration on the potential for a utopian visions of the future for

Sarajevo. This search for utopia, as a motivation for a better society, is set against the backdrop of a (still

unachievable) city for everyone and everyday, as described in the

European Urban Charter. Once confronted with views and insightful

opinions of thirteen Sarajevans, the normative character of this

document on urban rights quickly gains utopian status. How much a “normal” future became utopian?

Veoma normalno, veoma normalno ili O utopiji urbanih prava je istraživanje o potencijalima za utopijske vizije budućnosti

Sarajeva. Ova potraga za utopijom, kao motivacijom za bolje društvo, postavljena je u kontekst (i dalje nedostižnog) grada za svakoga i za svakodnevno, opisanog u Evropskoj povelji o gradu. Jednom suočen

sa stavovima i mišljenjima trinaest Sarajlija, normativni karakter ovog dokumenta o urbanim pravima ubrzo stiče utopijski status. Koliko je

“normalna” budućnost postala utopijska?

Documents

veoma normalno ok export - stealth.ultd.netstealth.ultd.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/very.normal.pdf · Ljudi se prilagođavaju stvarnosti, i prilagođavajući se, gube iluzije