Interviewed by: Ivana Golijanin
"Literature Without Borders", by university professor Selma Raljević, is the first scholarly book that systematically deals with transnational Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature, while also making an original contribution to transnational American literature. The book's presentation at this year's Bookstan is an opportunity to talk with the author about the book and all the important topics she addresses in it.
In “Literature Without Borders” (2023), you place great emphasis on the concept of “transnationalism.” What are the key issues of transnationalism and how did you approach them?
The concept of transnationalism/transnational is not widely known in Bosnia and Herzegovina, so it is first of all necessary to briefly explain its meaning. Transnational encompasses everything that is under the national umbrella, but transnational also encompasses what the national umbrella does not cover. Thus, the key issues of transnationalism, or transnationalism, are expressed and presented by the compound of these words, everything that encompasses the relationship between the prefix “trans” and the root word that concerns “national”. This means that transnational/transnationalism encompasses everything “through” the national, “across” the national and “beyond” the national. From this alone, it is clear and obvious that transnational does not nullify the national, but rather includes it, but transnational transcends and transcends the boundaries and limitations of the national. This also shows that transnational constitutes openness that stands in contrast to the closedness of the national. Namely, everything that concerns the national is limited and closed. It is limited by its own boundaries and closed within those boundaries. Also, transnationalism is in every way and in every way the opposite of nationalism. Transnationalism/transnational refers to the multiple connections and interactions that connect people and institutions across the borders represented by the nation-/state, as, for example, anthropologist Steven Vertovec puts it simply. According to the expanded interpretation of researcher and expert on transnationalism Yogita Goyal, the term transnational/transnationalism has replaced the older term multicultural, as well as multinational and cosmopolitan. In its breadth, it unifies these terms, just like all other terms similar or related to them in meaning, and also serves as confirmation of the interconnectedness of the world through the circular path of capital and culture. Transnationalism, as Goyal emphasizes, questions and calls for new, open and alternative reflections on the spaces of the nation and the national, as well as everything individual and collective in this regard, precisely in the direction of the interconnectedness of people and human societies at the local, regional, national and/or global levels, as well as in everything in between, in the past and in the present. At the very core of both the national and the transnational is identity, and questions of identity are crucial for both the national and the transnational. The relationship of the transnational to questions of identity is that neither individual nor collective identity is exclusively and solely “one’s own”. This implies equality, but equality that is not identical to sameness in the domain of negativity of the so-called melting pot of identity, but rather equality that creates and realizes the equality of every individual and/or collective difference. In my book Literature Without Borders (Studies on Contemporary Literature, Transnational Literary America and Transnational Literary Bosnia and Herzegovina) , published in the Sarajevo-Zagreb, and thus transnational, edition of Buybook and edited by Lamija Milišić, I approached all of this and achieved everything in the mutual parallelism, connection, intertwining, synergy and dialogue of the literary and non-literary world, with a focus on literary America and literary Bosnia and Herzegovina in modern times.
Transnationalism in the sense you just described has to do with looking at literature “from the outside.” Why is it important to look at literature beyond the borders of nation states?
First of all, the structure of the world in which we live is currently national, and so is the structure of world literature. Such a human organization of the countries of today's world has mostly added the determination of national identity to each person, or they are national identities in the case of multiple national affiliations, which are all determined in the individually prescribed ways of each individual country. However, the individual sense of belonging does not have to and often has nothing to do with such a specific national affiliation. Each individual culture is always a combination of diversity through its space and time, because it is always permeated by other cultures. Despite this, the nation is a self-limited and self-contained human creation of the collective identity of an "imagined political community," as Benedict Anderson, one of the most prominent theorists of the nation, would say in anthropological terms. The famous Edward W. Said adds that nations are also "interpretive communities", because he argues that nations must not only imagine themselves, but must also create their own histories, or interpretations of themselves. Therefore, the nation is like a closed box of an imagined political community. The same can be applied to other political categories of human communities, such as ethnic and religious ones, as indicated by the word “nation” itself. Namely, its original meaning from the Latin language is “kind, tribe, people”. The concept of nation encompasses all of this. And the concept of transnationalism encompasses all of this, but in a different, more open and previously explained multidimensional way. Transnationalism is also about overcoming the boundaries of national literatures, as well as such boundaries of literary scholarship, as I have shown and proven in my book by scientifically examining the manifestations of specifically transnational American and transnational Bosnian-Herzegovinian literature outside their national particularities, with which, of course, these manifestations always have some connection or relate to them in some way. It is important to observe literature outside of national frameworks, because national frameworks are limited, impermeable, incomplete.
For example?
For example, both separately and in relation to each other, many identities and entities of writers, as well as many identities and entities of their books, can be seen in various ways as identities and entities of two or more national literatures. This also leads to contact, dialogue, mutual connections and interweaving of the fields of national literatures. This has been happening for a long time in transnational manifestations of literary creation, but many national canons are rigid and one-dimensional because of their rigid and one-dimensional guardians who see transnationality as a danger and threat to the survival of their “imagined political community” and its , or rather, their , literature. In such settings, the canon is not in touch with reality and therefore needs to be changed. So, here transnational changes and modifications do not destroy or annul national literary canons, but rather change them transnationally, expand, supplement and open them in accordance with the factual situation. For example, the recently published unconventional, post-ideological, transnational and hybrid anthology Signal Area: Mapping Contemporary Prose in Croatia 2000-2020 is pioneering in this regard, in its case in Croatia. , in the authorship of selections and extensive introductory text by Jagna Pogačnik, with the contribution of expert collaborator, author of notes and biographies Tee Sesar, and edited by Katarina Luketić, and jointly published by the Croatian Society of Writers and VBZ in Zagreb. All in all, many occurrences both in literature and in life are larger than the framework of the nation/state. This is precisely what forms the basis of the ontology of transnationalism, and thus of transnational literature, namely its creation, production, reception, study, scope and reach.
What was the main motivation for this study?
I had many motivations for carrying out this study, and they are all equally important to me. I will mention at least a few. A scholarly book that systematically, in detail, and concretely deals with transnational Bosnian-Herzegovinian literature did not exist before the publication of Literature Without Borders . It is pioneering and revolutionary in this field, and it makes an original contribution to the scholarly discourse on transnational American literature, as well as contemporary literature in general. In the scholarship on Bosnian-Herzegovinian literature, especially in its center, that is, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the dominant and canon are still national and ethnonational, but the literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina itself has long and predominantly manifested itself transnationally, and in many ways. Transnational Bosnian-Herzegovinian literature has independently established itself both through the transnational identities and entities of writers, their individual transnational existence, creativity, and public activity, and through the transnational identities and entities of their books themselves. In addition, it is a fact that Bosnia and Herzegovina is not only becoming more and more, but has already become a nation of emigrants for a long time, so numerous writers and their books have many and multiple e/migrant identities in connection with it. In general, it seems to me that the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina are more outside it than inside it. In this connection, but also more widely and comprehensively than that, I am constantly learning new and previously unknown names and surnames of creators of transnational Bosnian literature and discovering their previously unknown books. I also wanted to create a book without borders, and not only in the Paresian sense of boundless and free-thinking truth-telling, not giving in to anyone and anything, which is what a scientific word should be, but also in the sense of an open, dialogic and multidimensional book that repeatedly crosses the boundaries and limitations in the domain of the possibilities of a single book. And books can do a lot, they just need to be read first. My motivation was also my desire for Literature Without Borders to broaden the perspectives of existing literary scholarship, to influence the revaluation of the existing literary canon, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and to establish dialogue with like-minded and dissenting readers, as well as to find a way not only to reach experts, but also to reach so-called ordinary readers. I tried to write it in a simple and understandable way, and I hope to make it intriguing and interesting to a wider readership. It is easy to write complicated things, and that was not my intention.
Which writers make and realize the transnational literary Bosnia and Herzegovina ?
It is made up and realized by writers whose own transnational identities and such existences in some way concern Bosnia and Herzegovina, and, at the same time or independently of that, those who, in their transnational literature in any language or in a combination of languages, write about the themes or elements of Bosnia and Herzegovina, partially or completely. In Literature Without Borders , I pioneered a possible classification and systematization of both transnational Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature and transnational American literature, in accordance with their individual characteristics. The chapter of the book that concerns transnational Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature is completely pioneering. There I listed a huge number of names and surnames of writers who, among others, make up and realize transnational literary Bosnia and Herzegovina as I scientifically see, show and prove it. Of course, they are not all, because it is never possible to list everything.
You mentioned migrant identities. How is the literature of migration involved in this?
The Bosnian-Herzegovinian transnational spectrum of migration literature has contributed most to the emergence, development and growth of the world and consciousness of transnational literary Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as awareness of all this. Numerous writers from Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as, in general, Bosnian-Herzegovinian citizens and, at the same time, former citizens of the former Yugoslavia, in various ways and under different circumstances, and due to the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as refugees, exiles, emigrants, and by finding themselves in another country when the war began, or in any other war or post-war migrant way, continued their lives in another country and/or became its citizens. In doing so, they have more or less become transmigrants – migrants who have developed their identities in a simultaneous connection with two or more cultures, societies, nations. Since the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries has seen more glocal migrants than ever before in history, Thomas Nail already indicated in the second decade of the 21st century that it will be the “century of migrants”. In line with the contemporary way of life, as well as the vision of the modern citizen, but also of “flexible citizenship” in transnational movements, he says that, in one way or another, we all become migrants. Unfortunately, a special and enormous feature of the human world in the past and in the present, and with increasing growth in the time we live in, is forced migration. Our modern times are horribly fertile for forced migrations of every type, whether they concern the living (more precisely, dying) reality, yes, post-Dayton (post-Dayton) Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is marked by decades of war tension, whether they concern specific wars in the present, the one in Gaza, in Ukraine, in Syria and all others around the world, as well as numerous other reasons. Awareness and awareness of all this is perhaps best expressed in transnational literature, and literary books are, in addition, also a kind of documents about reality. In their own way, they present everything that is, for example, a "blind spot" for historical documents.
Some of the writers considered in this study have moved from one place to another at some point, but the reasons for these movements are extremely diverse, as are the ways in which they incorporate this experience into their work. What do you think their impact has been on the literary culture of the countries they have gone to?
First of all, only the influence of such writers who managed to realize it in such a visible way is visible. Regarding how they achieved it, I remember the words of Vladmir Brik, the narrator and protagonist of the novel The Lazarus Project by Aleksandr Hemon, in whose paraphrase it is a combination of despair and fortunate circumstances. Of course, they are all gifted and skillful writers, but I suppose that it can happen that there are such, and that this is not recognized in the literary culture and society in which they are, that they have not experienced success, that they have not had happy, good and positive circumstances. They and their influence are, then, invisible. However, they are visible without question through their literature and books, as well as their own identity, regardless of the citizenship or citizenships they have, transnationally influenced and influence the literary culture of the country they went to. Each individual story is different and unique in its own way, and more or less each of them is, so to speak, a kind of both a recipient and a giver of cultural codes, both through their identity and life, as well as through the identity and life of their books.
How does the national literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina transnationally transcend that criterion ?
The literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina transnationally transcends the national determinant in many ways, from within, from without, and in the mutual relationship between the internal and external. In general, literature, as well as its creators, if they are not pathologically (ethno)national-politically engaged, greatly transcend political and linguistic borders and many other limitations of the nation. It is like this in many ways also in its individual specificities, and thus the space of Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature or the literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina is characterized transnationally, among other things. This refers to the various possibilities of literature in transcending the national determinant of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as its prevailing ethno-national determinants of the "constituent peoples" of Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs, and the national minorities of the so-called Others, within the "imagined communities" of the (ethno)national space of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as to the transnational "relationality" of the external and internal, while implying and encompassing all individual levels of internal "imagined communities". In the words that I wrote down and that appear in Literature Without Borders : "In contrast to the exclusively national, or more precisely exclusively ethno-national, the transnational concept of the literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina or Bosnian-Herzegovinian literature transcends and deconstructs the ethno-/national, religious, political and any similar 'logic' of the ' us versus them ' division, and in the relationship between the national and transnational, including the ethnic and religious and everything else under the 'roof' of the national, (implies) the pluralistic multi-voice and equality of all Bosnian-Herzegovinian identities, as well as a Bosnian-Herzegovinian identity that is not exclusive and only 'its own': neither as Bosniak, nor Croatian, nor Serbian, nor Roma, nor Jewish, nor Muslim, nor Catholic, nor Orthodox, nor atheist, nor agnostic, and then neither white, nor heterosexual, nor homosexual, nor unspecified... nor as Bosnian-Herzegovinian. So, in contrast to the Bosnian-Herzegovinian closure of ethno-national "...the exclusivity of the monisms of the identities of the 'constituent peoples' of Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, the transnational understanding of identity is such that one can be a Bosniak, a Croat and a Serb, and any other identity in equal equality, and in any of these identities not be only and only 'one's own'." So, the authors who create the literature of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and are not only and only "one's own", who are transnational, which implies a broad and comprehensive meaning and understanding of transnational, articulate a cosmopolitan, transnational and "hybrid", and in fact a normal vision of social life. Since in terms of human identities, just like culture, there are no "pure identities", to whose purist concept "hybridity" stands in contrast, then there are no "hybrid identities" of people either. The concept of "pure identities" of people is a terribly and fatally dangerous idea that is put into practice by ideologies of exclusive "unity" or monism, such as, for example, racism, (ethno)nationalism, and fascism, all of which, unfortunately, is shown and proven not only by history, but also by the world we live in today.
What is the relationship between comparative literature and world literature and what does it have to do with transnational determinants? It is impossible to read all the books written in their original languages, but here we come to the question of the importance of translation, which also has a transnational dimension. How do you see the role of translation in shaping author's poetics?
Comparative literature scholar Rebecca Walkowitz, for example, notes that the idea of books is no longer that their existence concerns only one literary system, but that they exist individually in various and different literary systems of the world. She adds that contemporary literature is, “in many ways, comparative literature: works are simultaneously in circulation within several literary systems, and can – some would say, should be read within several national traditions.” I completely agree with her and with this view, and it is a fact. This is precisely where the answer to your question about the interrelationship of comparative, transnational and world literature lies. Moreover, transnational literature in various ways, as indicated by the words mentioned above, “illuminates” individual national literatures. As for the translation of literature, yes – it has a transnational dimension. Thanks to translation, literature circulates, so to speak, in the world’s literary nervous system, and it is also one of the forms of transnational complementation, completion and expansion of national literatures. Let me clarify the latter using a specific example of literature that is both Bosnian and Herzegovinian and not only Bosnian and Herzegovinian – that is, using the example of transnational Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature and its creators: translating the literature of, for example, Aleksandar Hemon from English, in which he has long been writing and publishing his books, as well as Ismet Prcić, then Elvira Mujčić from Italian, in which she originally writes and publishes her books, Saša Stanišić from German, in which he originally writes and publishes, Velibor Čolić from French, in which he mostly originally writes and publishes, Alen Mešković from Danish, in which he originally writes and publishes, and others, enables their books to be included in the system of Bosnian and Herzegovinian literature. They enter Bosnian-Herzegovinian, as well as post-Yugoslavian, literature in their native language by translating their books from their non-native language, in which they originally write, and initially publish their books in some other national literary system, not in Bosnian-Herzegovinian. The role of translation in shaping their authorial poetics is thus transnational.
You are involved in the history of literature, so my question is this: how do global historical changes influence the way you approach world literature in this time?
Global historical changes cause-and-effect led to the state of the world at this time, and the non-literary and literary worlds are always connected and one always influences the other, with the fact that the literary world can also provide an idea, a spirit, a hint and a vision of the future of the non-literary, as it often does. All of this teaches us to think and think critically, to question, re-examine and reflect on the literary and, related to it, non-literary reality, and this can then further indicate the need for changes, and encourage and produce them. For me, literature in general, the science of literature, humanistic study and teaching of literature, which especially in modern times implies interdisciplinarity, are open spaces of freedom that I approach freely and openly. These are also areas of erudition where you constantly build general and special knowledge. In addition, they are endlessly interesting and fun for me, because is there anything more interesting and fun than discovering the unknown, gaining new knowledge, but also the imagination itself, which is created by literature, and which, after all, is necessary and necessary for the development of the world.
How does the postcolonial and multicultural approach to literature today differ from that of the 1960s to the 1980s? Is there a greater emphasis on breaking down oppositions in order to approach literature in a more "global" way?
Both the non-literary and the literary world moves and changes, so it is necessary that approaches to literature also change. The postcolonial and multicultural approach to literature in the period from the 1960s to the 1980s, which you mention that I deal with in Literature without Borders, concerns American literature and American studies. On the basis of all the transformations in American literature from the second half of the 20th century until today, which are connected with post-colonialism and multiculturalism, a "transnational turn or obr(a)t" took place and was realized in American studies. This, in other words, led to the transformation and pluralization, that is, the transnationalization of American studies and the canon of American literature as we have it today. Transnationalism, as well as postcolonialism and multiculturalism, do not end, as you say, oppositions in the name of a more "global" approach to literature, because they do not melt diversity into "unity", but imply pluralism and equality of diversity.
Transnationalism, therefore, requires that national and global, domestic and foreign be intertwined. Can all literatures achieve this?
I don't know all and every single literature to be able to give you a reliable answer to that question. I assume that they can, and not only that they can, but that they have probably all achieved it, or certainly most of them, each in its own way. No matter how much it is rejected, denied, neglected and ignored nationally anywhere, transnational literature in what you have mentioned and in all its manifestations unquestionably exists and continues.
You also write about a negative interpretation of transnationalism. What would that imply?
Yes, I am writing about a possible negative interpretation and a possible negative manifestation of transnationalism. The best answer to that question is Literature without Borders : "Transnationalism, in fact, has many meanings in different views and interpretations. It can, of course, have a negative interpretation and also a negative manifestation, as Goyal also notes. She, for example, says that, in a negative sense, the transnational framework can repackage, that is, in a new package, it can manifest a legacy of exceptionalism that connects Americanization with progress and modernity and suggests the inevitability of American domination the world, keeping the canonical text in the center, with a few ethnic exceptions that confirm the rule. That negative context can be applied to any other nation-/state and acquire new, essentially identical or similar meanings, if we replace the given American context with any other nation-/state. Any pathological cultivation and elevation of national identity, and the mythology and ideology of national exceptionalism, is, in essence, a characteristic of nationalism, which in the previously explained extreme and negative the transformation of transnationalism manifests itself, in fact, as masked nationalism or nationalism in a 'new guise', which, in its very foundation, transnationalism stands against." In addition, regardless of anything, if the words and actions of any writer "ever become nationalistic - if the words and actions of any writer are ever nationalistic, then and from then on that writer is a nationalist, not a transnational writer (which, too, can be changed, if, for example, the writer subsequently renounces such views, as history shows in some cases, and in others not). Some writers are, for example, unquestionably nationalists, such as, for example, Radovan Karadzic, who is also convicted war criminal. Also, for example, the Austrian writer Peter Handke is a nationalist because of his support for the Great Serbian nationalist regime of the war criminal Slobodan Milosevic, his nationalist views during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina and his denial of the genocide in Srebrenica, despite all the proven facts, the testimonies of the survivors and the verdicts of the International Tribunal in The Hague." So, one can be a national or bi-national or multinational and transnational writer at the same time, but one cannot be a national or bi-national or multinational and nationalist writer at the same time. Also, partially in this and generally in a different and broader context, it is quite possible to realize the identity of a book different from the identity of its writer, whether the writer himself creates the identity of his book different from his or the book realizes its identity different from the identity of the writer, but the identity of the book and the identity of the writer are always connected by authorship. The character of a book, so to speak, can be better than the character of its author. In other words, books can be more benevolent than their authors. I don't think that's rare.
Given that you are a university professor, can you share with us how much contemporary literary theory is "dealt with" in curricula?
Contemporary literary theories are dealt with most extensively and in the most detail in the curricula at the Second and Third Cycles of Studies. Compared to these levels, they are less represented at the First Cycle of Studies. I teach literature in various compulsory and elective courses at the Faculty of Humanities of the University "Džemal Bijedić" in Mostar. From the earlier to the older years of study, they are normally set up in such a way that one goes from studying older to more recent literature, as is necessary and logical. However, in practice, that is, in classes, I personally try to implement all of this in a parallel, connection and dialogue between the past and the present. In this way, in my work with students of the First Cycle of Studies, both contemporary literary theories and everything else that generally concerns our modernity are adequately present and represented. As part of my teaching, I try to bring to everyone as best I can what is more and what is less long ago and far away in any way possible, to present and explain everything I can to them so that it looks as if it is all happening here and now in front of us, and that they can not only understand, but also feel everything we are talking about, whether it concerns the past, the present or the assumptions, ideas and possibilities of the future. The fact that we talk, that we talk freely about everything, is always very important to me, because in the teaching process, my general goals are: acquiring and exchanging knowledge, understanding the subject, developing critical thinking while encouraging, promoting and preserving the freedom of its open expression and pronunciation, building creative thinking, as well as nurturing all humanistic values. Otherwise, I believe that knowledge about any subject theory or theories is not necessary. Namely, university education is also an educational process. Building knowledge is certainly necessary and necessary, but it is also necessary and necessary to contribute to the development and shaping of each and every individual in the direction of maturity and good human qualities. In all of this, the humanistic foundations are certainly literature itself, the study of literature and the science of it, and thus inevitably also contemporary literary theories. All of that, I would say, is equally and infinitely important, especially in today's world where, it seems to me, there are fewer and fewer educated, self-centered, unyielding, smart, creative, but also good and mature people.
At the beginning, you state that this study is only the beginning and by no means the end of your research into "literature without borders", and at the end that you have written the kind of book you yourself wanted to read. What can we expect from you on this topic (or maybe some other literary-theoretical topics) in the future? What else are you working on?
I always do a lot of things and on a lot of things, but due to numerous life-work obligations and commitments, I constantly lack time for what I want to devote myself to most in the segment of my life's calling that concerns my scientific and research work. However, all of this is inextricably linked to my life choices. To paraphrase Dubravka Ugrešić's words, I earned and earn the money to buy a broom myself, and I fly alone. By the way, I read more than I write, but I believe that is how it should be. What I can announce is that my new monograph is due to be published soon, published by University Press. In it, I comparatively deal with the collection of stories Dubliners by James Joyce, which this year marks the 110th anniversary of its first publication, and the collection of stories or, alternatively, the novel Winesburg, Ohio by Sherwood Anderson. The goal and intention of that book is, among other things, to give deserved attention to the relatively neglected and thus marginalized James Joyce's Dubliners in Irish and world literature, in relation to the status and fame of his later literary works, as well as to Sherwood Anderson himself and his Winesburg, Ohio , who are unfairly neglected and overshadowed by the personalities and works of later modernists, and thus marginalized in American and world literature. But now, above all, I am looking forward to the publication, not of mine, but of the late Zvonimir Radeljković's book A brave new world: Essays on American literature of the 20th and 21st centuries , also published by University Press. It was posthumously edited together by his son and university professor of literature Ivan Radeljković, university professor of literature Sanja Šoštarić and I, both of his former students, then colleagues and lifelong friends. It is to Professor Radeljković that I, along with my husband and our children, dedicated my book Literature Without Borders . I would not like to talk about what else can be expected of me in the future. I want to keep that to myself for now, simply because I have many wishes and plans, and I hope that life will not prevent me from realizing them in any way. Besides, I do not like pomp and fuss about anything. In today's world, paradoxically, the most valuable reputations are often held by those who are the noisiest and who most often have nothing to say. In that, I am not keeping up with today's world. And it seems to me that you are not either, when you have devoted so much space and attention to my words. Thank you!