Page 119 - Vinkler, Jonatan, Ana Beguš and Marcello Potocco. Eds. 2019. Ideology in the 20th Century: Studies of literary and social discourses and practices. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 119
Society as Seen in Slovenian Drama during Socialist Times and Today 119
556). It seems that Simona Semenič manages to create similar effects with
the openness of her text and its fragmentary structure. With this, she
forces the reader/spectator to continuously choose, fill in the blanks and
thus become the co-creator of meaning. Of course it is impossible to pre-
dict how they will complete or read the message of the text, but this is
not even that important. More important is the recipients’ involvement,
emotional engagement, which the author nevertheless deftly navigates to-
wards the criticism of modern society.
Conclusion
The image of society in literature is thus essentially determined with the
position of literature, in our case drama, in it. When it comes to drama,
this link is even stronger, as due to its close connection to the theatre, this
part of literature is actually always a societal and—because of its collec-
tive reception—a social phenomenon.
It is interesting that the plays studied are diametrical opposites when
presenting the society of the 1980s. To Jovanović, it appears to be a failed
utopia, even more, a dystopia that might have had some possibility of ex-
istence with a meticulous implementation of the freedom of the individu-
al. However, Jovanović also avoids the direct thematisation of social crit-
icism, which makes his text even more convincing. It demands that the
reader/spectator reads between the lines and locates the reasons for the
collapse of the zoolinguistics institute (society) into the centres of power
(most likely the authority with the Yugoslav People’s Army and UDBA).
This opening of taboo topics, however, does not bring activism and social
revolt, even though the drama writing wants it, but rather a sense of free-
dom or participation in the fight for it.
A good three decades later, the same historic period is shown as a
utopian contrast to the present. As a nostalgic image of humanism, val-
ues and the sense of personal interconnection that tints the prosaic ne-
oliberal present with even darker hues. Yet it again seems that Simona
Semenič does not want to be directly political, tendentious. Her black-
and-white tableau is simply a provocation that, together with a fragmen-
tary post-drama form leads us into a whirl of emotions and decisions, into
searching for message and meaning that should activate us and allows us
to think about our own position. About where we are ourselves and to
where we want to continue.
And it is in this orientation that the authors are very close to each
other. They both detect the mechanisms of contemporary society and
demand that the reader/spectator recognises him/herself in them. Each
556). It seems that Simona Semenič manages to create similar effects with
the openness of her text and its fragmentary structure. With this, she
forces the reader/spectator to continuously choose, fill in the blanks and
thus become the co-creator of meaning. Of course it is impossible to pre-
dict how they will complete or read the message of the text, but this is
not even that important. More important is the recipients’ involvement,
emotional engagement, which the author nevertheless deftly navigates to-
wards the criticism of modern society.
Conclusion
The image of society in literature is thus essentially determined with the
position of literature, in our case drama, in it. When it comes to drama,
this link is even stronger, as due to its close connection to the theatre, this
part of literature is actually always a societal and—because of its collec-
tive reception—a social phenomenon.
It is interesting that the plays studied are diametrical opposites when
presenting the society of the 1980s. To Jovanović, it appears to be a failed
utopia, even more, a dystopia that might have had some possibility of ex-
istence with a meticulous implementation of the freedom of the individu-
al. However, Jovanović also avoids the direct thematisation of social crit-
icism, which makes his text even more convincing. It demands that the
reader/spectator reads between the lines and locates the reasons for the
collapse of the zoolinguistics institute (society) into the centres of power
(most likely the authority with the Yugoslav People’s Army and UDBA).
This opening of taboo topics, however, does not bring activism and social
revolt, even though the drama writing wants it, but rather a sense of free-
dom or participation in the fight for it.
A good three decades later, the same historic period is shown as a
utopian contrast to the present. As a nostalgic image of humanism, val-
ues and the sense of personal interconnection that tints the prosaic ne-
oliberal present with even darker hues. Yet it again seems that Simona
Semenič does not want to be directly political, tendentious. Her black-
and-white tableau is simply a provocation that, together with a fragmen-
tary post-drama form leads us into a whirl of emotions and decisions, into
searching for message and meaning that should activate us and allows us
to think about our own position. About where we are ourselves and to
where we want to continue.
And it is in this orientation that the authors are very close to each
other. They both detect the mechanisms of contemporary society and
demand that the reader/spectator recognises him/herself in them. Each
