UNIVERSITY OF ZADAR

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY

Ida Duvnjak

Antagonizing over the role and work of the Croatian National

Theatre ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka between 2014. and 2016.
B.A. THESIS

Mentor: prof.dr.sc. Biljana Kašić

Zadar, 2017.

CONTENT
1
1. Introduction.......................................................................................................5

2. Aim, purpose and research questions................................................................6

3. Theoretical and social basis for the analysis.....................................................7

3.1. Operational framework of CNT in Rijeka...................................................7

3.1.2. Political and social framework.............................................................7

3.1.3. Legal and financial framework............................................................7

3.2. Sociology of art and theatre........................................................................8

3.2.1. Postdramatic theatre............................................................................8

3.2.2. Theatre audience..................................................................................9

4. Research methodology....................................................................................10

4.1. Research strategy......................................................................................10

4.2. Data collection process and time frame....................................................11

4.3. Method and sample...................................................................................11

4.4. Data processing.........................................................................................12

5. Results and discussion.....................................................................................12

5.1. Political level.............................................................................................12

5.1.1. Urban (City of Rijeka) and national level.........................................13

5.1.2. Theatre personnel as political subjects...............................................15

5.2. Aesthetic level...........................................................................................18

5.2.1. What is national theatre?....................................................................18

5.2.2. The question of provocation...............................................................20

2
 5.2.3. The problem of shaping the audience and its competence................21

5.3. Religious level...........................................................................................23

5.3.1. The question of secularization and the autonomy of art.....................25

5.3.2. Interrelation of religious and national aspect......................................26

6. Conclusion.......................................................................................................27

7. Literature.........................................................................................................30

ANTAGONIZING OVER THE ROLE AND WORK OF THE CROATIAN

NATIONAL THEATRE ''IVAN PL. ZAJC'' IN RIJEKA BETWEEN 2014. AND 2016.

3
SUMMARY

This paper deals with the conflict of meaning attached to the work and activity
of the Theatre in Rijeka between the years 2014. and 2016. Abductive research strategy was
used throughout this research to determine the level of conflict and symptomaticity for
phenomena in a broader social context. The research includes nine semi-structured interviews
conducted with the Theatre personnel, i.e. people involved in the production of meaning, or
people who publicly expressed their opinion on the issue of theatre activity. Included in the
research as well are two focus groups – one comprising citizens who watched the plays, and
the other including citizens who didn't watch the plays. Those who didn't watch the plays
varied in age. After the interviews were analyzed, three key levels of antagonism could be
distinguished: political, artistic and religious level. Political level critically positions the
Theatre towards broader social reality and doesn't deal exclusively with criticism of
established politics. Even though the Theatre's work has adapted well to the political matrix in
Rijeka as far as the established politics go, it hasn't adapted to the national political matrix. As
far as the Theatre audience goes, attendance to the plays was selective, and most visited were
original plays with current popular political topics. Conflicts over using religious symbols in
plays were in correspondence with a research whose results has shown that secularization in
Croatia is at its lowest level.

Key words: theatre, art, religion, politics, postdramatic theatre, audience exodus, antagonism

1. INTRODUCTION
Siegfried Melchinger's claim that ''political theatre is as old as the theatre itself'' (1989:
5) highlights the politicality of theatre as something that comes along with theatre activity.

4
Theatre is a specific form of art because it involves lively presence of both performers and
spectators. It is related to its community as a common meeting point, but also as something
that fulfills citizens' spiritual and cultural needs (Bošković, 2016.). In that sense theatre is
always a space that offers citizens a sense of stability and the possibility of identifying oneself
with a certain community (Petranović, 2013.). In other ways, theatre possesses what is known
in sociology as symbolic capital, and as such can serve as means of social mobilization
(Dragojević, 1995.).
That is why this paper shall deal with social antagonisms induced by the Theatre in
Rijeka by its political and ethical positioning. More precisely, the theatre in focus shall be
Croatian National Theatre ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka between October 2014. and July 2016.
This particular time span was chosen because when the new management took over the
Theatre, they emphasized on their official website (Blažević & Frljić, 2014.) that their activity
shall be critical and emancipatory, advocating the importance of affirmation of different social
minorities. On the other side, they announced an open dialogue with the audience and
encouraged their reconsideration of theatre boundaries. Theatre activity that later followed
triggered turbulent reactions by various groups of people. Different interpretations by groups
of people on Theatre's work resulted in multilevel verbal and physical conflicts. The causes of
these conflicts lie in the antagonism over Theatre's work whose inner-theatre and outer-theatre
space spread on different levels.
Therefore, the issue of this paper is social antagonism and what it represents to its
participants. The research shall focus on the antagonisms that arose from Theatre's activity in
the mentioned period of time, especially visible throughout the reception of plays by the
audience and the citizens, trying to explain the social context of its activities. The research so
far only grasp the issue of this paper partially. Different academic papers deal with certain
topics: the issue of a theatre audience, the issue of financial and legal conditions of a theatre,
or theatrically speaking – the issue of production and reception of a theatre play. The research
mentioned are partly used throughout the field of sociology as well, but nevertheless are not
substantial for the phenomenon of social antagonism. Antagonisms arose for reasons that
cannot necessarily be categorized as aesthetical or theatrical criteria or interpretations.
Therefore, it is crucial to take into consideration society and religion research results, as well
as sociological subdisciplines when interpreting antagonisms. The complexity of theatre
reality requires that the levels in which antagonisms appeared are determined.

2. AIM, PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

5
 This paper deals with the analysis of social antagonisms caused by the activities of the
Theatre in Rijeka from October 2014. and July 2016. The aim of this research was to
determine the levels on which different social antagonisms appear, and shed some light on
what these antagonisms reveal in the social and political context of the Theatre. The first part
of the paper deals with the political role of the Theatre on both national and local levels, and
to describe some of the Theatre personnel's experiences as political subjects. When talking
about antagonisms on an aesthetic level, different opposed viewpoints on the concept of
national theatre are presented. Beside these conflicts over how people perceive the role of
national theatre with a hint of political and social background, there is a strive to explain the
notion of provocation as an artistic act. Furthermore, there is an endeavor to explain the cause
of problems with the audience's play reception that arose from misunderstanding certain
aesthetic paradigms and theatrical procedures. Considering a common observation that many
antagonisms in the performed plays are related to religious symbol usage, there is a tendency
to clarify the connection between secularization and the autonomy of art, as well as the link
between the national and religious aspect in the audience's reception.
A specific purpose of this paper is to research social and political background of
antagonizing over the role of the Theatre with respect to aesthetic, political and religious
aspect. Research questions and guidelines are:
- to define the role of theatre as a political figure on a local and national level
- to describe Theatre personnel's experience as political subjects
- to present different interpretations of provocation as a theatrical mode
- to determine what are the causes for the problem of audience's reception of certain theatrical
plays
- to describe different interpretations of religious symbols used in the plays
- to explore the connection of the subjects towards the autonomy of the arts and theatre
programme, and to connect this to their understanding of the term secularization
- to clarify the connection between religious and national aspect in the reactions of the
audience and the citizens regarding the content of the plays
The purpose of this research is to see, based on the answers to the above questions, to what
extent political and social conditioning is present in the activities of cultural organizations,
and to determine the possibility of cultural institution having a reverse influence on the itself's
political and social framework.

3. THEORETICAL AND SOCIAL BASIS FOR THE ANALYSIS

6
3.1. Operational framework of CNT in Rijeka
3.1.2. Political and social framework
According to some authors, ''theatre helped shaping the nation'' in Croatia and enhance
its homogenization (Petranović, 2014). Petranović states that theatre historiography
emphasizes the role of national theatres when it comes to arousing national awareness and
protecting a country's culture and national identity, which in some ways resulted in creating
selective memory and forgetting about national theatre history. That kind of revisionism in the
recent past, i.e. since the 90's, has manifested itself as a ''militant rhetorics of expatriation'',
and referred to people who didn't fit into the established national identity framework.
When talking about national identity in Croatia, it should be emphasized that it is
closely related to the religious orientation of citizens' as members of a Roman Catholic
community. After the Croatian War of Independence in 1991., the number of Roman
Catholics increased by 30% (Nikodem, 2004.), which led up to strengthening Croatia's
national and religious, as well as political identification, but also decelerated the process of
secularization. Research in the field of sociology of religion in Croatia shows a high level of
religiosity, and the lowest stage of secularization (Čerpić & Zrinšćak, 2009).

3.1.3. Legal and financial framework

Theatre activity is largely determined by various laws and cultural strategies enacted
on different levels. Culture related laws and strategies are part of a certain cultural politics
designed to steer a society's cultural progress, and protect the public interest in the field of
culture. According to the documents titled ''National Report'' from 1998., and ''Croatia in the
21st century – cultural development strategy'' from 2003., cultural politics is being interpreted
as a part of a public state politics that should respond to the community's needs. These
documents emphasize the strategies in favor of deetatisation, i.e. shifting the decision making
responsibility on experts. For this purpose Culture Councils are founded, through which
independent experts would have more influence. This is how better quality and transparency
of financing cultural institutions is ensured (Bukvić, Mihaljević & Tokić, 2015.).
When it comes to the specific case of national theatres, namely the Croatian National
Theatre ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka, its founder and owner is indeed the City of Rijeka. Theatre
management is appointed on the motion of Theatre Council by the founder representative, and
the nomination is confirmed by the Ministry of Culture. Theatre Council is composed of
artists and cultural employees, and this position is appointed to them thanks to their
contribution in the field of culture. The Ministry of Culture's role isn't negligible, for it

7
decides on the budget fund distribution for cultural projects, it supervises the work of cultural
institutions and can have deciding influence on its management. That is why, according to the
Croatian National Theatre's Work Report analysis, when it comes to financing the theatre
whose title is national, they are mostly being financed by the state budget (87.9%). Their
subsidize partly depends on the city whose role is that of a founder and an owner, and partly
on the Ministry of Culture as a principal organization on a national level (Bukvić, Mihaljević
& Tokić, 2015.).

3.2. Sociology of art and theatre

In general, sociology of art deals with artistic issues in order to gain certain cognition
on society. It treats a work of art as a special kind of ''social fact'', observing it the form of
aesthetic reception. It observes a work of art through the aspect of its aesthetic communication
with the audience. Sociological aesthetics explores social circumstances in which the work of
art occurred, and how those circumstances affected its origin, in order to better understand the
aesthetic phenomenon. When talking about sociology of a theatre, this paper includes the
perspective of the sociology of art, but also gives a perspective on the sociology of aesthetics
(Božilović, 2006.). For example, Jean Dauvignaud (1978.) points out that a theatre
programme should reflect (on) the current events in a society, not merely being its reflection,
but also having a reverse influence on this very society. His understanding of the sociology of
theatre surpasses the statistics and data analysis, and penetrates the analysis of certain works'
historical relevance and interdisciplinary approach.

3.2.1. Postdramatic theatre

To approach the matter in hand, one should first precisely define what kind of theatre
shall be discussed about. Theatre as a form of art in the case of CNT ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka
imposed by the former Theatre administration, as Blažević (2012.) calls it, falls into the
category of postdramatic theatre paradigm. Postdramatic paradigm is a theoretical concept
introduced by H. T. Lehmann (Blažević, 2012.). The term ''postdramatic'' refers to a
somewhat different understanding of dramatic theatre in a sense of grasping the plot,
authorship and theatre illusion. Regarding the plot, postdramatic theatre doesn't imply
standardized plots that narrate the story in a certain way and gives meaning to life and the
world. As far as the authorship goes, a dramatic text that inspired the play dictates every
element of the play, and the success of the play depends on the similarities between the text
and the play. And the most important is the fact that postdramatic theatre breaks all the

8
illusions that the play is set in another time or place. Postdramatic theatre deals with the
mentioned time and place of a play, pointing out their very own life situations instead of
''taking'' the audience someplace else or in some other time. This kind of illusion breaking
presents a crucial element for the politicality of this type of theatre. Of course, the term
postdramatic theatre is used only for the purpose of understanding the antagonisms
appearance, hence the interpretation is simplified.

3.2.2. Theatre audience

Theatrologist Sanja Nikčević writes about the so called exodus phenomenon of the
audience from the theatre when it comes to plays that are a part of the postdramatic theatre
paradigm. She states that those kind of plays are considered to be ''incommunicable, violent
and shocking''. Without affirming the meaning of life and the world, that type of modern
theatre that is often deprived of a fixed plot and characters is precisely the cause of the theatre
audience exodus. Nikčević puts the blame on the authors of those plays because they show no
respect for the audience's opinion and taste, therefore certain theatre projects cannot be
financially profitable (Nikčević, 2015.).
When talking about theatre politicality, it is worth mentioning the simplistic nature of
the audience (Lukić, 2009.) whose experience of a play is uncensored and intuitive. The
theatre counts on the performance being a point-blank one-time thing, and uses those
circumstances as an opportunity to raise a bold and active audience, as oppose to an audience
raised in a consumerism manner being taught to sit quietly in its own passivity. However,
when a theatre deals with crucial problems of a society in a postdramatic, straightforward
way, it ''provokes'' and becomes a media event whose audience takes on broader range. That is
how theatre uses media coverage to encourage and provoke everyday controversy and
political polemics. It communicates with the society, not only through the aspect of art, but
also as a political figure.

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1. Research strategy
The complexity of the mentioned phenomenon is best to investigate through the
abductive research strategy, which was indeed used in this research. The focus of the research

9
was social antagonization over the role of national theatres, city and state authority's
perception, questions of provocation in art, the autonomy of art guaranteed by the secular
state, and theatrical expressions. The research dealt with motifs and reasons inside and outside
the theatre. In this case, inside the theatre includes theatre administration, actors and a
member of the orchestra, and outside the theatre includes activists and theatre audience, as
well as the citizens of the City of Rijeka who don't go to the theatre. Theatre personnel are
included as people whose participation induced different reactions outside the theatre, which
led to social antagonization. Subjects outside the theatre are people (either as part of the
audience or part of the citizenship) to whom theatre activities are addressed to, and who
participated in any way in the social antagonization.
In order to understand each of the subjects' reactions in certain situations, in this case
inside and outside the theatre, the process of standardization is used to abstract individual
motifs and actions into typical motifs and actions in typical situations. In the meantime, the
research focuses on the common knowledge of the subjects, symbolic meanings and rules
subjects are guided by throughout their actions. The process of standardization is possible
because the issues being antagonized over by the subjects aren't just private matters, but
intersubjective as well, i.e. subjects own them because they belong to a certain group. Hence,
sociological explanations and certain social phenomena comprehension are possible (Blaikie,
2000.).
Choosing the interpretative approach as an important approach in the qualitative
methodology was correspondent to the theatre phenomenon this research deals with. Different
interpretations of the role of a national theatre, misunderstanding of certain theatre aesthetics
and actions, as well as misconception of the effect theatre has on the society, are all reasons
that led to social antagonization. Also, when we talk about theatre activities, we speak of
something communicable that leads us to a space of common knowledge and common
content. By using the process of standardization, it is possible to determine, describe and
understand some of the patterns for theatre content reception. Since opposed social groups are
being discussed, the interpretative approach allows us to observe a group not through the lens
of the other group, but also to observe how each group perceives themselves.

4.2. Data collection process and time frame

The research process began with reading the literature on the Theatre work framework
(social, political and legal), literature on specific types of theatre, and literature on media
coverage of the Theatre's work and its impact on the public. An important part of this research

10
was also going to the Theatre and watching some of the plays in order to get a better insight
on its effects. In order to understand the process and reasons for choosing a specific Theatre
administration, an interview was conducted with the president of the Theatre Council. After
that, a method and a sample for the research were set, and of course the time frame of the
research was defined, and it started with the first interview conducted on May the 14th 2016,
and lasted until the last interview conducted on June the 24th 2016.

4.3. Method and sample

A semi-structured interview and the focus group were chosen as methods that could
elicit answers on the research questions given to the participants. The semi-structured
interview method was used so that participants could express their opinion in an adequate way
regarding specific events related to Theatre's work. Semi-structured interviews also offer an
insight into certain segments of Theatre's activities that participants notice, but that couldn't be
visible through studying the available content. This method also corresponded to the purpose
of the research, because by asking various subquestions this method enables we were led to
the content this paper was interested in, but the participant wouldn't bring up in their answers.
Furthermore, this interview enabled its participants to express the content wanted in a more
relaxed atmosphere.
Being that participants' roles with respect to Theatre were different, the questions were
different. Nevertheless, the theme and the general topic were the same. For example, if in
some of the interviews a new and relevant topic appeared, other participants were asked about
that topic as well. This procedure facilitated the data collecting process.
The main criterion for including participants in the research was their involvement in
different conflicts over Theatre's work, whether it was about the Theatre personnel, or citizens
who reacted pro or against the Theatre. Some of the participants were chosen through
snowball sampling method. The interviews lasted between half an hour and an hour and a
half. Two focus groups were chosen that included citizens of Rijeka. The first focus group
involved citizens who watched some of the postdramatic plays in the CNT ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in
Rijeka in the given period of time. The second focus group was comprised of citizens who
didn't watch postdramatic plays. In this group a sample of the maximal variation was used.
Participants from the second focus group differed in age and occupation (students, workers,
retirees). We wanted to know what are the key points of the antagonization when it comes to
citizens who publicly expressed their opinion on Theatre's activities. We also wanted to see in
what ways that attitude differs among participants who watched the plays and among those

11
who didn't. Duration for the focus group with participants who watched the plays was an hour
and a half, and for the focus group whose participants didn't watch the plays was 40 minutes.

4.4. Data processing

After the transcription was done, we switched to the coding process using descriptive
and interpretative codes. Three levels of antagonization represent three main categories in the
coding process: political, aesthetic and religious level. Political level includes subcategories
such as urban and national political context, and Theatre personnel as political subjects.
Aesthetic level involves subcategories such as elements of postdramatic theatre, the question
of provocation, aesthetic predisposition and the national theatre phenomenon. Religious level
comprises subcategories such as religious symbols, artistic freedom and secularity, the notion
of religious and national, and the relationship between the archdiocese of Rijeka and the
Theatre.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After the interviews were conducted, we were given answers to the questions set at the
beginning of the research. The rest of the paper offers an insight into the participants' answers
and thoughts regarding the research guidelines, and all shall be substantiated with quotes
highlighted in order to clarify the issue.

5.1. Political level

The events that occurred inside and outside the Theatre shall be interpreted as events
with social sources and social consequences. Shortly, the antagonization shall be analyzed and
interpreted with respect to the national (Croatian) and urban (Rijeka) social context. In order
to get by easier throughout the research, the paper shows the process and the effects of the
antagonization on three basic levels: political, aesthetic and religious. What turned out to be
obvious from the participants' responses was the fact that there are several key points that
indicate the difference between the City of Rijeka and the rest of the state in the political
sense. More precisely, it is obvious that the specificity of Rijeka's political heritage and
context differ from the one established in the 90's on the national level. A different
relationship of an established politics towards the Theatre is vivid both on the local (Rijeka)
and national level. On both local and national level different people expressed their
disagreement with the Theatre's work, but their strategies distinguished significantly.

12
5.1.1. Urban (City of Rijeka) and national level
The City of Rijeka and its mayor expressed support for the Theatre's work and the
public influence of its personnel. Beside the Theatre Council, the mayor Vojko Obersnel and
the City of Rijeka as the Theatre's owner played a crucial role in choosing the Theatre's
administration, therefore their support was expected and logical. Head dramaturge of the
Theatre, Marin Blažević describes the mentioned relationship as follows:
''When it comes to politics in Rijeka, things are pretty much simple. First of all, the founder
and the owner of the Theatre is the City of Rijeka. That means nobody can ignore the fact
who's your owner, especially when we talk about the finances... The question of political
authority in Rijeka and its potential influence on what we do in the Theatre is a completely
different issue. I can assure you there was never even an attempt of such influence nor the
need for political intervention on what we do...''
The Theatre's work was not immune to certain political events on a national level. It
was critical towards the government's actions, surpassing the standard framework of a theatre.
For example, Blažević claims that the former government named Domoljubna koalicija acted
treacherously to the aspect of culture. This is how he expressed his view on the state politics:
''I believe that this government's treacherous actions towards the historical and cultural
heritage of the City of Rijeka, especially the actions of its extreme right-wing revisionist
politics, had a certain impact on the rapid downfall of their government.''
''...it's curious to see how the very people who swear on their 'nation' and 'country' are the
same people who shamelessly privatized and betrayed their country's interests. There is no
doubt that literally every day there is a shift in the way the ''nation'' perceives them, but also
there are changes visible among the ''nation'' and the ''state'' itself. The CNT in Rijeka, who
for the past two years has been creating a critical viewpoint on the issues like nationalism,
revisionism and (neo)fascism in Croatia's past, could soon face a new challenge when it
comes to its responsibility.''
From this response we can conclude that the Theatre took a critical stand towards the
former government on a national level, but failed to address a critical speech addressed to the
current City authority. The effects the critic had on the government became visible with the
arrival of Zlatko Hasanbegović at the position of the minister of culture. During the pre-
election campaign in 2016., HDZ made an election promise to the voters in Rijeka that Oliver
Frljić shall no longer perform his duty as the director of the Theatre in Rijeka. When this
political coalition finally came to power, one of their moves was cutting the budget funds off
for the Croatian Drama ensemble, while the Theatre in Rijeka was given a lot less financial

13
support. The minister of culture claimed that this decision was made because the Theatre
leadership allegedly didn't perform the scheduled programme. This is how the Theatre
personnel interpreted their action:
''…our funds were cut off, that's true. That is just one of the ways how the government deals
with people who are ready to speak the truth, and I personally think their move was very, very
low.''
''…yes, we were cut off by the Ministry of Culture. One could always say that's because of the
programme, but of course we all know it's a tit for tat situation. They didn't get our support,
therefore we got less money, and the Croatian Drama ensemble didn't get anything.''
The Theatre got in touch with the Ministry of Culture and the public, defending
against accusations via press conferences. This situation became a part of a political discourse
that shaped their fate on a national level, which made them peripheral subjects who were
constantly forced to react to or deny various headlines concerning their work.
''…this is a situation where Marin Blažević always has the need to refute certain statements,
or is forced to claim our audience is increasing, we have more subscribers, the profit is
higher, that the former administration's debts are already covered by the Theatre and the City
of Rijeka…''
The above quotes make it obvious that when it comes to politics as an area of power
and personal interests, the role of an artist as a political subject isn't a role of power, there are
no immediate political consequences in the field of established politics. Instead, the artist's
role navigates within firmly established coordinates of political power on both urban and
national levels.
On the other hand, there were other subjects present in the City of Rijeka who
protested against the Theatre's work and the Theatre management in the studied period. Those
subjects were religious and war veterans associations, members of the right-wing, and other
individual activists. Their actions and ways of expressing disagreement were various. Some of
the examples were saying a prayer during the play in front of the Theatre, creating a Facebook
page named ''Fire Frljić and Blažević'', a protest along the city promenade Korzo, assaulting
the Theatre building, numerous posters all over Rijeka etc. What all of these actions had in
common was the fact they were marginalized, i.e. they weren't a part of a dominant political
discourse in Rijeka. Here are some of the interlocutors' statements on their need to express
disagreement:
''One of our religionists who attended the play wrote a letter to the Archbishop, explaining its
low-level content. When we heard about it, we were appalled by the fact Jesus Christ and our

14
religion are being depreciated in such disgusting way. That is why we organized prayings in
all of the parishes. We also gathered around the Theatre and circle it in hopes our prayers
will help remove those kind of plays and mister Frljić.''
''It was I who created the Facebook page named 'Fire Blažević and Frljić, lets restore CNT's
dignity', and it almost reached a thousand followers...''
''Hm, my first action was putting up posters for the premiere of the play 'Hrvatsko glumište'.''
These quotes indicate that the subjects used opportunities like public gatherings and
social networks, strategies which are clearly marginalized by people who aren't involved in an
official discourse. These subjects' motivation was related to their common beliefs and point of
view, through which they connected.

5.1.2. Theatre personnel as political subjects

The chapter above has shown in what ways did the Theatre's political actions led to
antagonisms on both urban and national levels. That kind of political action of the Theatre
personnel was specific in many ways. In order to demonstrate the specificity of artists and
political subjects, two actors from the Theatre expressed their content over the social and
political engagement of the Theatre. On the other side, one of the Theatre personnel who
wished to remain anonymous expressed his discontent by saying:
''...fighting some kind of 'neofascism' (laughter), war topics, war victims, totalitarian regimes,
all sorts of minorities (laughter)...these would be the most present topics.''
The actor and the actress interviewed, Jasmin Mehić and Jelena Lopatić, pointed out
some other topics worth mentioning:
''...what Frljić did in the play 'Turbofolk' wasn't just raising awareness about a certain
''lifestyle syndrome'' when it comes to turbofolk music, but also questions its role in our
society's life...''
Beside ''a lifestyle syndrome'' that the play ''Turbofolk'' discussed about, the Theatre
dealt with the current condition in its own profession. They also talked about the relationship
of their colleagues towards other colleagues who were members of minority groups in the
play ''Hrvatsko glumište'':
''The name of the play 'Hrvatsko glumište' was of course significant because the play opens up
about the spoken word of the entire theatre personnel...''
Finally, here is Marin Blažević's explanation of the topics chosen for the programme:
''...I think each of the plays in the trilogy critically observes some of the key issues in our
society that's changing on a daily bases...First, we have the issue of violence in the play

15
'Bakhe'. Simply, it talks about a bully and the victim of their bullying. The play 'Aleksandra
Zec' raises awareness on the victim's life, and the play 'Hrvatsko glumište' talks about an
artist and his role when it comes to the issues mentioned...''
The quotation above makes it clear that the Theatre did in fact speak out about some of
the burning socially ethical issues and political topics, approaching them in a way that wasn't
customary in a public discourse until then. When talking about topics relevant for the society,
it is important to notice that the Theatre personnel as political subjects doesn't only address
the Theatre audience. The actors mentioned earlier pointed out:
''When we performed the play 'Trilogija', I remember war veterans coming here and
performing memorial service for us actors and for our souls' redemption because we defiled
religious symbols.''
''I think my calling is some sort of a cultural mission through which I try to convey a certain
topic or an idea that appears as a problem in a society to the viewers, to the audience, to the
world, to the people.''
''We did that for the citizens of Rijeka, but also for the entire Croatia.''
''I wouldn't like to sound harsh, but I think the politicians should visit theatres more often,
even though they're not interested. They are pretty much vain in a sense they'll lay at night
contemplating over what was written about them in the media and what kind of reactions they
triggered in the public.''
Blažević is surprised about the Theatre's popularity in the media:
''...the only thing I'm still surprised is the scale of reactions. I think it became a topic of
national interest.''
When revisiting Theatre's work, Oliver Frljić also emphasized the importance of
addressing to a wider audience:
''Revision included a lot of things – from attempts to end the decision making hierarchy, to
performative breach of a certain national theatre to the most neuralgic spots of a social
tissue.''
It's interesting to notice that the opportunity for the Theatre personnel to become
political subjects and be politically active within their profession involves their personal
decision. When a theatre leadership decides to be politically active, theatre personnel become
politically involved as well. Some of the Theatre personnel embraced that kind of political
engagement, and others didn't. Here are some of their reflections:
''I mean, it's ok to produce a play like that. But to hang that kind of billboards on the Theatre
building it's just too much. It's like we're some sort of clowns goofing around. We are a

16
serious institution. For example, the Opera department really does a great job. Quality
projects are arranged, collaborations with foreign artists and orchestra conductors are
stipulated… but people don't get that impression…''
''I could definitely talk to our director and tell him I'm not ok with how things are run here…
but there is a certain fear present about how that will reflect on my employment.''
''Frankly, there were certain scenes in the plays that were desecrating some of the values I
believe in and are important to me. But I didn't watch the plays, so I couldn't tell for sure.''
Clearly, this Theatre employee is scared to use their name when expressing their
opinion and disagreement, and the fear of losing their job confirms it. The interlocutor points
out that the Theatre's obvious political orientation puts its political engagement in the
foreground, while all the other artistic content falls into second place, which makes us look
frivolous.
The actor and the actress we interviewed talked about their experiences that are
completely different from the ones the former Theatre employee stated. It's worth mentioning
that both the actor and the actress were directly involved in the plays with political content:
''…I really felt the full meaning of the word 'mission' when we started working with Oliver
Frljić.''
''…in a manner of speaking, we always talked about certain issues others weren't allowed to
or weren't ready for. But if we consider the fact that a theatre is a mirror of society, it should
act like it. A theatre isn't (just) a place of leisure. Of course, it does have that element if we
want to watch a comedy. But you can set a problem and present an issue you think is worth
mentioning even in a comedy play. In this area we live in, sometimes we need to deal with a
trivial theatre like the one Frljić presented throughout his plays. He deals with certain issues
that are considered to be…hm…weak spots of the society…things that are present, but aren't
really discussed about because they're suppressed.''
''I need these kind of plays for myself. I need it not only as an actress, but as a person. After
performing in such plays, I really feel like I'm doing something useful, like I'm part of a
change…''
Unlike the anonymous employee earlier, the actor and the actress look at theatre work
as an opportunity for social engagement, and consider performing to be fulfilling. Hannah
Arendt (Arendt, 1996.) points out that political activity is related to building one's personal
identity, and these actors confirm it. That kind of engagement had consequences, which is
also an important aspect of an authentic political activity, according to Arendt. The actors

17
expressed their discontent over the lack of solidarity among their fellow actors from the
''Croatian Association of Dramatic Artists'', from which they finally stepped out of:
''…I had a feeling that the 'Croatian Association of Dramatic Artists' was comprised of many
different currents… it's all about giving awards away and shutting your mouth in return…''
''…it would actually be great if we could only act in an artistic way, instead of thinking about
who will be the one to slaps our faces. I often spend my nights thinking about those issues and
preparing support speeches and stuff like that... for example, I am very proud of our work
with the plays 'Nad grobom glupe Europe' and 'Hrvatsko glumište', but there was more fuss
about the reactions the plays caused in the public, than about our artistic effort. We always
end up hurting someone's feelings.''
The employees' comments makes it obvious that the Theatre's political activity didn't
cause the same reactions and pleasantries among the Theatre personnel. However, it's also
visible that the very intention for political action was not to support one of the political
parties. Instead, the politicality was supposed to be achieved in a form of criticism of the
Theatre personnel, who considered to be their duty as responsible citizens. However, that
reflected on their work in a professional sense, and aesthetic as well.

5.2. Aesthetic level

Participants' answers have shown that in the process of evaluating Theatre's work and
creating antagonisms, formal and stylistic categories that belong to the aesthetic field weren't
present. This is an indicator to the fact that postdramatic paradigm isn't a change of type or
genre, but its usage is a turning point with aesthetic, social and political function. In that
situation, the political and the aesthetic level interwine, changing the way we perceive and
treat the aesthetic level. Theatre is a form of art whose production reasons makes it tightly tied
to economic and social requirements, which was shown on the example of the controversy
over defining the role of a national theatre.

5.2.1. What is national theatre?

The history of the national theatre in Croatia, as stated by Petranović (2014.), isn't
possible to observe independently of its national matrix and national state as an organized
form of political life. If we go back to the Theatre case study, we could notice that the
antagonization actually arose over how people perceive the role of a theatre. The Theatre

18
administration didn't have a vision of a traditional national theatre whose role would be
affirming the state's national self-consciousness since the formation of the new state. Instead,
the Theatre worked on reviving the forgotten theatre memory. The purpose of reviving theatre
memory was condemnation of the banishing rhetorics that was current in the 90's, and whose
living protagonists didn't dissociate from the accusations. The Theatre management and
personnel told us how they perceive the Theatre, by bringing up past events that do not fit in
the dominant narrative, but are worth mentioning in order to enlighten the social reality and
hope for a public tolerance. It's important to notice that such initiative withholds an intention
for self-reflection of the Theatre as a national institution and the condition of their profession.
That is why the play ''Hrvatsko glumište'' has an important role in this case:
''I consider theatre to be a space of counter-memory, where all that's been said is left to an
official oblivion. (...) National theatres mostly operate as fridges where imaginary national
culture is being kept from spoiling. Those kind of cultural politics is deprived of any chance to
generators of a different social reality.'' (OF)
''The fact that national theatres are being perceived as something overly political and
ideologically neutral – which isn't and cannot be true – created a reaction in a moment when
a certain CNT declared its ideological position loud and clear. There is no culture that can be
apolitical or even national, because it's by nature an ideological apparatus that reproduces
certain values and interests of a single social class, representing it as common.'' (OF)
''...they actually cut out a topic with Anja Šovagović Despot where she condemns Rade
Šerbedžija and Krešimir Dolenčić who gave a very ugly statement related to the issue of
Serbs...'' (JL)
''...I've heard a lot of stories that actors of different national descent simply weren't given
roles in plays. Instead, they hired actors who acted publicly as spokesmen for Croatia. That is
not a bad thing for those actors, but it's not fair for the others who weren't hired. That was not
an ideal situation for people who were against the war and said: 'It was all a mutual state.'
Some people were actually exiled from Croatia, a situation we're all very familiar with
because we were given a lot of materials for the play concerning this issue, especially the
case of Mira Furlan and Rade Šerbedžija…'' (JL)
Some of the participants in the focus groups and one of the activists from Rijeka
disliked their viewpoint on the theatre role. It's interesting to see how the role of a national
theatre is being perceived as neutral in the political sense:
''The main task of the CNT in Rijeka is to be a national theatre. It has a certain programme
that needs to promote national culture and so on. When Blažević and Frljić came along, they

19
completely destructed the national component and took Croatians their right to have their
own theatre in Rijeka…'' (VS)
''Simply put, in this case we have a national institution that insults a large part of the
Croatian nation… He attacked people's feelings, he assaulted what most people love, right. I
think he isn't in a position to do such things…'' (FP)
''That is not objective. It's not something that's widely accepted. It's his own political
orientation and a man in his position shouldn't have the right to spread. He should be
spreading something neutral…'' (FP)

5.2.2. The question of provocation

Some of the Theatre management's actions drawn the attention of a wider public. It
was about hanging posters with politically provocative content on the Theatre building.
Through this content the Theatre revealed its political opinion regarding various issues. On
the other hand, the content of the plays was also brought to attention because it contained
certain provocative acts like nudity, minors performing on stage, urinating on stage etc.
Participants of both focus groups mentioned these elements, as well as other interlocutors we
interviewed. One of them claimed that the Theatre management used that sort of actions to
promote the plays and increase ticket sale, violating the integrity and respectability of the
institution. Others emphasized the artistic function of those elements that fits into the aesthetic
paradigm of the institution. There are participants who claim that successful usage of such
shocking elements varies from play to play:
''The entire play seems like a shock effect. The only thing that matters in the play is that the
public is astonished by certain shocking scenes and images… to draw people's attention and
open a discussion. (…) Impressing the audience with acting as an artistic performance isn't
the most important part of a play anymore, no…'' (FP)
''In the play 'Kompleks Ristić' that was totally forcefully introduced… however, in the play
'Turbofolk' they made it happen with the character of Željena. It didn't seem like it was
something subsequently inserted so that later on people could say the actress was stripping on
stage and showing her personal stuff. I don't know… the play moved me because it was kind
of natural the way she depicted a primitive behavior present in the society…'' (FR)
''Everything that has happened since Frljić became the director was inappropriate. A theatre
is a cultural pillar of a community, and to bring up certain personal opinions seems
inadequate. Unfortunately, today we have a situation where the majority is being terrorized
by the minorities. (…) The posters are still multiplying in the daily papers Novi list and on the

20
Theatre building, and it's just not right. That kind of propaganda could work with a cinema,
but not with a theatre. But that's just my personal opinion.'' (SF)
The conceptual authors of these actions that were seen as provocations point out an
important element of their work, and in which ways these elements open up a dialogue on
topics that are taboo in the society, and raise different perspectives than the ones we're used
to:
''He's giving us actors an opportunity, not to express our opinions through the plays, but to
invite you, the audience, to converse and open up a dialogue. I mean, even if just three people
start a conversation on a topic of the play, that's a big deal...'' (JM)
''If properly devised, I think that a provocation could have social, artistic and political aims
that surpass the very act of provocation.'' (MB)
''I think that provocation means intervening in a certain problem or certain attitudes that are
buried or impenetrable. Provocation isn't a joke, although it could be. Provocation is a kind
of well planned piercing action, and in that sense I think that performance was the most
serious thing we did...precisely for the people who gathered there.'' (MB)
According to Gruić (2009.), when it comes to theatrical and art work whose manner is
provocative, a value of such action lies in the revelation of the context in which it occurs. It is
precisely this act of provocation that pushes the wider public to get involved in the theatrical
reality of a play. The way they're included often indicates the outline of the reality we live in.
More specifically, through the act of provocation theatrical reality moves away from the idea
that the theatre world is an isolated one, and invites its audience and the entire society to
evaluate and ponder over the content presented. By offering a content that isn't self-
explanatory and receptive, a theatre is at risk of losing its audience.

5.2.3. The problem of shaping the audience and its competence

The participants of the focus group who watched the plays claimed that some parts
were difficult to follow, that they disliked the acting, that the content of the plays didn't match
its titles etc. All of these elements correspond to the formally-stylistic features of a
postdramatic theatre, the so-called ''aesthetic paradigm'' that includes theatrical work the
Theatre management engaged in. According to Nikčević (2016.), the so-called audience
exodus relates to that kind of theatre, the question is did the same thing happen with the CNT
''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka, and what was the cause of it. The Theatre personnel noticed that
attendance to certain plays did in fact decrease:

21
''...not to mention we lost some of our sponsors, and a part of our regular audience stopped
coming to the Theatre...even some of the schools and teachers. When we were doing the play
'Hrvatska rapsodija', which is now called 'Nad grobom glupe Europe' (...), there is a scene of
abortion, actually similar to the one shown in Krleža's drama play where women talk about
abortion and losing their babies. But now we talk about it. If we performed it by using
Krleža's lines, I guess it would be fine, but because we did it, now we face condemnation. This
led to schools canceling the subscription one after another, and by the time we performed the
play for the third time, the Theatre was empty...'' (JL)
''The play 'Hrvatsko glumište' was sold out whenever it was on, whether independently or
within the 'Trilogy', at least twenty times. (...) Frljić's play 'Kompleks Ristić' was empty all the
time. The play 'Hrvatska rapsodija' also scored very poorly, and we really worked hard on it.''
(MB)
Clearly, the attendance varied from play to play. ''Hrvatska rapsodija'' and ''Kompleks
Ristić'' are the plays that had a problem with attendance, while plays like ''Hrvatsko glumište'',
''Turbofolk'' and ''Trilogija o hrvatskom fašizmu'' were completely sold out. All of the plays
mentioned have formally-stylistic features of a postdramatic aesthetic paradigm, thus we
cannot agree with Nikčević (2016.), who claims that these kind of theatrical actions pushes
the audience away from the theatre. The participants of the focus group who watched the
plays have different opinions on the plays they've seen:
Hm...one cannot simply understand a certain play if one isn't informed and educated enough.
For example, not all people know what Ristić complex is and what does it represent. On the
other hand, everyone can watch the play 'Turbofolk' and relate to it in some way.'' (FR)
''...I think that, if I decide to watch the play 'Hrvatska rapsodija' written by Krleža, then I
expect to see Krleža, and not something completely different. After that I'm not sure what is
Krleža and what is Frljić, and everything is mixed and I don't know what to get out of it. And
since I didn't read Krleža and I don't know the topic of his drama play, everything gets
unorganized and confusing for me. If I decide to watch a classic piece, then I want to watch
that precise thing.'' (FI)
Some of the viewers have difficulty of understanding certain plays if they're not
informed about it in advance. Another problem was the disparity between the director's
interpretation of a classic literary work and its title. It's interesting that the plays that weren't
based on a literary work, and directly deal with social issues, managed to get full attendance.
Those plays were ''Hrvatsko glumište'', ''Turbofolk'' and ''Aleksandra Zec''. The culturologist
Damir Mišković explains that this is due the content that corresponds to the reality in a true

22
manner, which leads to viewers being able to identify themselves with the content of the
plays:
''...I think that the audience is pretty much conservative, but it didn't have the opportunity for
a different kind of identification. Not just through the aesthetic ingress, but through the
content ingress as well. In our case, the audience was finally given the opportunity to
encounter that type of identification, that is why they assumed such hardcore positions,
because it wasn't discussed about until now. But it seems to me that this type of change is
difficult to 'produce' in our institutions if you aren't radical enough in your actions.
Therefore, radical changes needed to be made within the content in order to carry out formal
changes.''
Audience absence for certain plays caused competence limitations among the people
in the audience, but also worldview disagreement among the traditional part of the audience.
This part of the audience approaches certain topics Nikčević (2016.) considers to be absent
from affirmative theatre that confirms traditional values and the meaning of the world. One of
the participants of the focus group who watched the plays sees the things that happen on the
stage as a threat to social norms:
''…if the Theatre is financed by taxpayers who accepted, for example nudity as a normal thing
in the Theatre, then the question that imposes is – what's the next level, where are the
boundaries? (FP)
In any case, it's important to emphasize that the very intention of the Theatre
administration was indeed to change the attitude of the audience towards the Theatre:
''The most important thing concerning this issue isn't about people buying tickets and coming
to the theatre. It's about starting to contemplate over the theatre, thinking about it. The fact
that you and people who explore the theatre world in a way that isn't consumerist, is a big
step. It's not about you thinking like me, or me thinking like you. It's about making a change,
being stimulated by a different theatre in a way you start reviewing and wondering about
theatre in general.'' (MB)

5.3. Religious level

This chapter shall deal with questions over the rise of the antagonisms connected to
religious content, i.e. religious symbols used in the plays. The interpretation of the
antagonisms shall link the religious level with the political and aesthetic levels, but also with
the social context. The first question in order is the use of religious symbols in the plays that
was insulting for some of our interlocutors. Statements of the Theatre personnel shall be

23
presented first, in order to show their intentions and their viewpoints on the critics coming
from the religious people who found themselves insulted:
''…the main point of all this is that we didn't deal with religion as a sort of a postulate or a
dogma…we didn't mean to change anything related to this issue. On the contrary, we only
presented this topic and the people involved in it, the things they did in the name of religion,
and their misreading of religious texts just to propagate certain ideas to people.'' (JM)
This interpretation isn't in accordance with the one certain citizens of Rijeka have
about the usage of religious symbols in plays. A group of citizens of Rijeka who organized a
prayer in front of the Theatre building in Rijeka during the play ''Hrvatsko glumište'', declared
this act as blasphemous. What bothered the interlocutor (in this case, the priest) who gave the
statement above was the inappropriate context where religious symbols were used as
instruments of equating religious people and the members of the Ustasha movement
responsible for numerous war crimes. Even though the interlocutor thinks there are numerous
cases where religious people indeed were Ustashas as well, he's personally offended by the
generalization:
''…I personally didn't watch the entire play, because I simply don't want to. (...) I don't want
to believe that nowadays people would mock, for example, the Last Supper. The image of the
apostles at the Last Supper is something sacred for me and I don't even want to play with it.
Also, there were the scenes of Communion in the play. I've read some comments that the act
of Communion was actually an illusion to cannibalism (eating the body of Christ) and was
compared to the Ustasha movement. (...) I'm not saying some priests weren't involved in that
movement. I'm just saying there were priests who advocated the freedom for an independent
Croatian state, right. Therefore, their motivation was positive. There is this phrase that goes
'the road to hell is paved with good intentions…''
One of the participants of the focus group who's a retiree, beside the complaint on the
blasphemy, had other complaints as well. She's a member of the audience that, according to
Nikčević, abandons the theatre. Nikčević claims that changes that occur within this form of
art whose role in the 20th century is social criticism, led to the process of creating art that the
public doesn't like anymore. She states that the audience escape is caused by profanity,
violence, explicit scenes of sex and criminal, and the absence of the affirmative genres
mentioned earlier (2016.). This statement is in accordance with the opinion of the retiree,
who's a member of the focus group that organized the prayer in front of the Theatre building:
''Not only this was about the act of consorting with a cross and the image of Jesus Christ.
There was also one play with the description that goes like this: 'Ballet with sex. Karamarko,

24
we invite you for sex.' I mean, beside the fact I'm a religious woman…I think that sort of
things are unacceptable. I guess I'm not a part of this modern society, but I'm against it when
it comes to theatre…''

5.3.1. The question of secularization and the autonomy of art

Some of the participants of the focus group that didn't watch the plays think that a
theatre doesn't have the right to set up plays that insult religious feelings, while others
consider art shouldn't be limited by boundaries, and that the autonomy of art should be
protected by the secular state. One of the interlocutors pointed out that he's a religious man,
but thinks that one of the most important trait of a secular state is the right of criticism. His
opinion goes hand in hand with the term postsecularism which implies that secularization has
influenced the attitudes of religious people (Matoš & Renić, 2016.).
''I'm a religious man, but to be honest, I didn't like how the people circled around the Theatre
building and prayed. First of all, we're a secular state, therefore, the authority of our state
doesn't belong to the pope, but to democracy. For example, I just went on a trip to Toskana.
This whole region in Italy is considered to be 'the mother of Renaissance'. How did
Renaissance arise? When people separated from the Church.''
On the other hand, some of the participants of the focus group who considered that the
play hurt religious feelings, revealed a lack of understanding of the term secular state, which
led to a discussion among the group of religious people. In the mind of certain religious
people, differences between secular and religious institutions are still not clear:
''I can hardly give an opinion, considering the fact I didn't watch any of the plays. All I've
heard about Frljić was information I read from the newspapers. I do not agree with the
gentleman, because I was raised in a household where the Catholic Church was a very
important institution. Arts should have boundaries. I think politics shouldn't interfere with the
arts, but the arts shouldn't interfere with the Church either. That's something that is sacred to
people. (...) But he knew that and he did it on purpose. The state of Croatia is declared as a
Catholic state, right?''
''But the Constitution says it's a secular state.''
''Yeah, but still…''
This quote confirms the research results presented in the Introduction part of this
paper, which has shown that secularization in Croatia is at its lowest level.

5.3.2. Interrelation of religious and national aspect

25
 During the period this research refers to, in order to point out certain social anomalies,
the Theatre has used religious and national symbols in numerous occasions throughout its
work, and put them in contexts that are different that usual. Whether the symbol used in a play
was national or religious, the citizens' reactions were similar. The reactions were mostly based
on the fact something sacred to these people was being desecrated. The symbols put in a
different context outshined the message of the plays. For example, in the play ''Hrvatsko
glumište'' the actors fence with crosses, the statue of Saint Mary wears Ustasha cap, etc. The
religious people's reaction was to circle the Theatre building and to pray. On August the 5th,
the day of commemorating The Operation Storm, i.e. Homeland Thanksgiving Day, a public
discussion was organized where Muslim women talked about the times they were raped by
Croatian soldiers during the war. Special police forces had to protect the Theatre building
from football ultras group ''Armada'' breaking and entering. Thus, even though the context of
conflicts with the Theatre management was different, both events resulted in protest.
According to Nikodem (2004.), there is a connection of Roman Catholicism and nationality
when it comes to Croatian citizens' identity. Two the most numerous groups of citizens
rebelled against the Theatre work – the first one was members of the Catholic Church and the
second one included football ultras group ''Armada'', a group of veterans and members of the
political party HDZ from Rijeka. Statements from our interlocutors could also confirm the
connection mentioned before:
''Actor Leon Lučev came to host in a play, and after that went to a local bar. There were
several pretentious big young men, they were members of 'Amarda', and they started
attacking him, like what kind of plays are we performing, do we have something against our
state or religion...'' (JM)
''So the thing was, on the Homeland Thanksgiving Day, the Theatre management hung an
LGBT flag on the Theatre building. The other thing is that on that day the Croatian flag was
half-mast. This started a debate that our Theatre has something against the Croatian state
and our sovereignty...'' (JL)
''We had war veterans coming here to complain about the play 'Trilogija'...'' (JL)
''...people misread certain scenes we wanted to convey concerning religion and God. We have
numerous 'God and Croatians' and 'For Croatia in the name of God' quotes written on the
street, and it's just hideous because people committed crimes under these slogans. (...) And
that is what we wanted to show in the plays. But people complain about how much money they
spent just to watch a play mocking their moral 'values'...'' (JL)

26
6. CONCLUSION
The aim of this research was to explore different levels of antagonization, mostly the
social one, that were induced by the management of the CNT ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka, in a
period between October 2014. and July 2016. The main decision of the Theatre's new
management, according to its director, is to be a postdramatic and a political theatre. The
paper also tried to present in which ways the Theatre personnel, the audience and members of
certain local social groups influenced the postdramatic paradigm of the Theatre, and what
does this tell us about the current social and political context. Also, we tried to discover in
which ways the Theatre, as an important cultural institution, influences its social and political
framework.
The analysis of interviews has shown that the antagonizing meanings different
participants attached to the Theatre's work and its influence and affect on the audience in
general, could be divided into three levels: political, aesthetic and religious. These three levels
are defined as those on which the social antagonization took place.
When talking about the political level of the Theatre's work, the antagonization has
indicated the specificity of the political scenery in Rijeka, in relation to the rest of the Croatia.
It has been revealed that Rijeka's established political scenery show a different, positive
attitude towards the national culture, as well as different understanding of the role of a
national theatre as a place for questioning one's national identity. Members of the local
political power supported the Theatre's management through the whole time, especially when
members of the national political power withheld their support. On the other hand, different
groups of citizens, like religious people and war veterans from Rijeka, expressed their
discontent of the Theatre's work by using strategies of the margin, i.e. hanging posters,
organizing protests and being active on social networks. Nevertheless, despite the attention it
triggered, CNT ''Ivan pl. Zajc'' acted as a marginal subject on a national level, addressing the
current political power through the media and putting billboards on the Theatre building.
Despite the Theatre's national strategy of deetatization when talking about culture, as well as
the financial obligation that concerns supporting a national theatre, The Ministry of Culture
stated blurred reasons for financial sanctioning of the Theatre. Some of them were aesthetic
and programming reasons which clearly indicated their misunderstanding of theatrical
postdramatic activities, as well as ignorance of the Theatre programme. Some of our
interlocutors clearly stated that this was due to the political disagreement with this Theatre's
work. When talking about the Theatre personnel as political subjects, it's worth mentioning
some of them were proud of their work and supported the Theatre management, while others

27
considered the seriousness of this institution and political neutrality of the Theatre has been
compromised, but didn't want to publicly express their opinion due to fear of losing their job.
Concerning the aesthetic level, there are conflicting meanings present around the role
of the Theatre, and they deal with the issue of political neutrality of a theatre, provocations in
the arts and the audience's competence. The first conflict of meaning related to political
neutrality has shown that political neutrality implies incorporation of an institution of theatre
into the dominant narratives, a fact declared as desireable by some of our interlocutors. By
using provocation, the process of including the wider public into the theatre reality was
successful, but the process was often accused for banality, nudity, autorship disrespect, using
religious and national symbols, incomprehensibility, etc. That kind of interpretation could be
explained as a failure to recognize a postdramatic theatre paradigm, and failure to properly
recognize its value. Theatre's work was approached superficially and in a sensationalist way
by the public, who refused to deal with the issues the Theatre has presented on a deeper level.
This sensationalism was often a reason why certain plays that fall into the category of
postdramatic paradigm were sold out, and others weren't. ''Audience exodus'' was often linked
to certain institutions like schools, and the Theatre also lost some of its sponsors at the
expense of its work and activities. It's worth mentioning that the role and the importance of a
theatre has been recognized in the society. However, the thing that wasn't always recognized
was the theatre's role to be self-reflexive and critical to its own history and creativity, as well
as to its society. This was exactly the goal of the Theatre's management in the mentioned
period of time.
Finally, the religious level shows that conflicting meanings over the use of religious
content and religious symbols by the Theatre have pointed out the problem of understanding
secularity in Croatia. There was an issue of linking desecration of religious symbols with the
violation of social norms and boundaries neccessary for a society to function properly. In that
sense, using religious symbols in plays was pronounced dangerous for social order.
As the research conducted by Čerpić i Zrinšćak (2009.) show, Croatia has the lowest
level of secularization. This is confirmed by findings from this research, where certain
interlocutors stated that the Theatre management should be dismissed for religious
desecration, as well as that Croatia is a state declared as Catholic. However, the research
indicated that there is an increasing number of religious people who are critical towards the
Church, and think that it shouldn't have the final word when it comes to moral and political
issues of our state. This is also confirmed by the discussion among the religious people of the
focus group. Some of the religious people think it's acceptable for the Theatre personnel to

28
use religious symbols for the purpose of social criticism, an act they think is a theatre's main
task. Still, others think religious symbols shouldn't be used in a profane context. Similar are
the opinions on using national symbols, whose desecration lead to public disapproval and
protests of people demanding the Theatre's management resignation.
To conclude this paper, when it comes to antagonisation over the work of CNT ''Ivan
pl. Zajc'' in Rijeka, it has shown that the concept of a postdramatic theatre succeded in
opposing subjects inside and outside the Theatre, at the same time displaying the close
connection of events in the field of culture with the contemporary social and political context.
In the researched period of time, social and political context has influenced and defined the
world of the Theatre in a great deal, but the social context also became more transparent
thanks to the work of CNT ''Ivan pl. Zajc''.

7. LITERATURE

Arendt, Hannah (1996). Political essays. Zagreb: Antibarbarus.

Blaikie, Norman (2000). Designing social research. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Blažević, Marin & Frljić, Oliver (2014). ‟New, responsible and different – theatre of Rijekaˮ
– http://hnk-zajc.hr/sezona-20142015/ (last visited on January 19th 2017.)

29
Blažević, Marin (2012). A Defeat That Was Fought For, Zagreb: Disput.

Božilović, Nikola (2006). ‟The range and perspectives of sociological aestheticsˮ in Facta
Univeritatis-series: Philosophy, Sociology and Psychology, 5(1): 65–76.

Bukvić Bestvina, Ivana; Mihaljević, Marija & Tokić, Ivana (2015). ‟Cultural politics and the
impact of the legal framework on theatre financingˮ in Law Journal, 31(3-4): 147–165.

Črpić, Goran & Zrinšćak, Siniša (2009). ‟Dynamism in stability: Religiosity in Croatia in the
years 1998. and 2008.ˮ in Social Research, 19(1-2): 2–27.

Dragojević, Sanjin (1995). ‟Influence of cultural, social, and symbolic capital on the
development of Central and Eastern European Countriesˮ in Sociology Journal, 26(3): 177–
188.

Gruić, Iva (2009). ‟The case of Bakhe – a big invisible theatreˮ in Theatre, 37/38, 54–59.

Lukić, Darko (2009). ‟Whole world is an audience: researching audiences in contemporary

western theatrologyˮ in Theatre, 39/40, 24–46.

Matoš, Bruno & Renić, Dalibor (2016). ‟Postsecularism: models of integrating religious and
secular understanding of rationalityˮ in New Presence: Journal of Intellectual and Spiritual
Issues, 16(2): 203–218.

Melchinger, Siegried (1989). Political Theatre, Zagreb: Grafički zavod Hrvatske.

Nikčević, Sanja (2016). ‟Modern theatre and the audience or from audience's contempt to
justification of its escapeˮ in Days of Theatre of Hvar: Materials and Discussions on
Croatian Literature and Theatre, 42(1): 149–173.

Nikodem, Krunoslav (2004). ‟Religious identity in Croatia: Dimensions of religious identity

and socioecological orientationˮ in Social Ecology: Journal for Ecology And Sociological
Environment Research, 13(3-4): 257–286.

Petranović, Martina (2014). ‟Theatre historiography and national identityˮ in Fluminensia,

26(1): 149–162.

Štulhofer, Aleksandar & Murati, Tomislav (1993). ‟The future of sociology: The future of our
profession as we see itˮ in Sociology Journal, 24(3): 203–212.

30