ASPECTS OF OTHERNESS IN THE EARLY MILOŠ CRNJANSKI`S TRAVEL DIS- COURSE ABOUT BANAT SHWABIANS IN THE LIGHT OF POTESTARY IMAGOLOGY

Abstract

This paper is focused on potestary imagology aspects in the travel prose of Miloš Crnjanski, a topic related to problems of the life of the Shwabians settled in Banat who, after the First World War, belonged to the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians. War repercussions were in a specific way reflected on the post-war life of the Banat Shwabians, who in the new social context, found themselves in the position of Inner Otherness. The subject of the research has been consid- ered on the grounds of striking travel testimony of Crnjanski [About Banat and People from Banat, and Reports from Vojvodina, from 1923-1925]. It is noticeable that the Crnjanski’s perception of the Shwabians is built in the form of an imagem on the counterpoint of an opposed bilateral pair identity / alterity. Thus, Crnjanski’s perceptions of his own country, authorities and people are considered in the same way. In the position of identity is a Serbian entity and in the position of alterity is a German [Shwabian] entity. Visualisation brings views onto positive and negative properties of both sides of the opposed pair. With reference to the above, special attention is given to potestary imagology conceptions with an emphasis on communicative aspects of the authorities and their attitudes towards the Shwabian Otherness, as well as the attitude of the Shwabians towards these authorities in a concrete cultural context.
It can be said that Crnjanski is of the opinion that instead of being enclaved in the ethnic Otherness, functioning on the principles of habituation and metis; concerned only with their own interests; apathetic towards other subjects and circumstances in the context - the Banat Shwabians should have been more integrated and actively and constructively involved in resolving post war social and political crisis in the Kingdom. Thus, in the new state, they would have been accepted and less “foreign”and they would have contributed more to the general wellbeing of the new state union. All the time, through indication, Crnjaskishows that this state union “has not succeeded in becoming the accepted new home” to the Banat Shwabians. On such a Shwabian Othernessin the given context, the potestary mechanism of the Kingdom of the Serbs,Croats and Slovenians had obviously given negative response rejecting the Shwabians as a “foreign body” and letting them to the other state about which Crnjanskitestifies impressively in Žombolju na točkovima [To Jim- bolia on Wheels].