Talk:Meša Selimović/Archives/2007/April

Selimovic as a Serbian writer and not "Bosnian"
In his Testament to SANU (Serbian Academy of Science and Arts) in 1976, Selimovic explicitly negated any connection of his to any national literature aside of Serbian, foreseeing possible outcome of future Yugoslavian crisis:

http://www.srpskidespot.org.yu/Tekstovi/PismoMeseSelimovica.htm


 * "I come from a Muslim family in Bosnia, and by nationality I am a Serb. I belong to Serbian literature, and consider my works in Bosnia and Herzegovina, to which I also belong, just a home and the center of my literature, and not a separate literature of Serbo-Croatian language on its own. Any attempts of separating the two, for any cause, will be considered as a violation of my fundamental rights, guaranteed by the Constitution. Therefore, I belong to the nation and literature of Vuk, Matavulj, Stevan Sremac, Borisav Stanković, Petar Kočić and Ivo Andrić. It is not necessary for me to prove my deepest kinship to all of them.


 * "The addressing of this testament to SANU is not coincidental. It is my explicit demand that it should be considered as essential autobiographic data."

Marechiel 18:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The quote in question has been in the article since its creation. A kind of compromise was reached after painstaking discussion above, and I'd appreciate if you read it before trying to impose WP:TRUTH. If you have something to contribute on Mesa's life, and works, it would be far more useful than reopening the debate on his ethnicity again, which hasn't brought anything good. Thanks. Duja ► 16:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Define a compromise. Is it a "middle solution" between the truth and non-truth, or a middle solution to please both Serbian and Bosniak nationalistic agenda? I call for the reconsideration of the desicion about the final aricle. Selimovic's Testament cannot and will not be such brutally ignored. If it takes to repeat it over and over what his own words and his own demands were, then it is what it takes. '"I belong to Serbian literature, and consider my works in Bosnia and Herzegovina but a home and the center of my literature, and not a separate literature on its own. Any attempts of separating the two, for any c

ause, will be considered as a violation of my fundamental rights, guaranteed by the Constitution. It is my explicit demand that it should be considered as an essential autobiographic data."' Selimovic's official, final, and ultimate will, stressed in his Testament to SANU.


 * Explicit. Demand. Who among petty Internet nationalists can put his own agenda over Selimovic's work, and who is entitled to do so? According to the man whom we are talking about, there is no Bosnian literature, and if there was one, he considered himself not a part of it, nor did he agree that his work should be "separated" into two literatures, exactly foreseeing what would happen, and what did happen.


 * The arguments used above, like the ones that he lived in Bosnia, and wrote about Bosnia are irrelevant. Those kind of arguments do not make Rudyard Kipling Indian writer, but explicitelly Brittish. Selimovic was a declared Serb, who wrote in what was then called Serbo-Croatian language, and considered himself and his work as part of Serbian literature exclusively. Not a part of Serbian literature as well, but a part of Serbian literature exclusively. The agreement of three Wikipedia editors from Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia that happend to be online at one moment in the past is rather irrelevant. This is Wikipedia in English, and certain standards ought to be met. It takes more than three ex-Yugos to agree on it. (Reverting back, see Selimovic's Testament). Marechiel 16:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * And you wholesale reverted addition of 5 paragraphs and 4 references because you didn't like wording of the intro? And you got the nerve to call other editors "petty Internet nationalists" when all your "work" on Wikipedia consists of fixing the ethno-national background of Nikola Tesla, Enki Bilal and Meša? Like it or not, Meša is considered part of Bosnian literature as well as of Serbian one by others, even if he perhaps denied it himself. And his testament, even if it is an agreed fact, is not a binding clause for Wikipedia. Is there something in the current introduction and text that doesn't fit the facts? If you don't want to contribute to description of his works and his life in an encyclopedic way, then please don't impose your version of The Truth. Duja ► 08:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * 1. OK, I'll pay attentnion next time to edit the intro only. 2. Etno-national background is an important issue. 3. You will not call the truth "my version" of it. Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian, especially considering the language, are political categories and late Selimovic made himself clear considering those issues. It IS a "binding clause" for Wikipedia, that he was of Serbian ethnic background, wrote in Serbo-Croat and made himself a part of Serbian literature, and not Bosnian. You can, of course, call him "Yugoslavian", or "European", or "modern", but you cannot do two things: a) call him a part of Bosnian litereture he himself denied and b) deny his belonging to Serbian nation and literature. And yes, I DO have the nerve to call petty Internet nationalists what they are. Marechiel 22:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) Which just proves that you didn't even read the article 2) No, I maintain that it's not, at least not so important to be quarelled about in the introduction section; it is recorded in the article though (which you apparently didn't read according to (1) ). 3) ...but I guess that (1) and (2) clarify who is a "petty Internet nationalist" here. No one denies him belonging to Serbian nation and literature. If you don't want to be part of solution, there's no need that you be the part of the problem. Duja ► 08:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I will not comment the above reply, since its author is obviously intellectually incapable of realizing the point of what was being said and because of the low level of the comment itself (the "which only proves that you are..." and "it clarifies who is the..." ones). And, on the other hand, because of obvious lies; in every "introduction section" of every writer, both the ethno-national background and literature are mentioned. ("Yugoslav" --how tasteless; how come this non-existing reference is never applied to people of Croatian background, for instance Miroslav Krleža or Ivan Goran Kovačić).
 * It is not the right thing to do to mask and blur actual facts when they do not coincide with nationalistic agenda, in this case (perhaps) Bosniak one. It is not the right thing to do to make one Serbian writer, one of the central writers in modern Serbian literature, who even explicitly declared who he was and to whom he belonged, less Serbian. Judging by the opening paragraph, he was everything but Serbian. That is not right. The opening paragraph is supposed to sumarise the most important points of the article. Instead of that, we have that he was a "Yugoslav writer" whose dialect has shaped "Bosnian standard language", that he dealt with Bosnian Muslims and is considered to be a part of Bosnian and Serbian literature, respectively. The truth is that Selimovic was a Serbian writer from Bosnia and Herzegovina whose work is, nevertheless, claimed by leading Bosniak literates because of his Muslim background, so both objective and his own affiliation are being relativised, obscured, ignored and viciously denied, and those who point out to that accused for "nationalism" and "ignorance" and labeled as "trouble-makers". Marechiel 22:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)