Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy

One of the most striking elements of Dušan Grabrijan’s and Juraj Neidhardt’s oeuvre is the extent and freedom of associations with the contested Ottoman legacy in the first decades of the socialist era in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as seen in their book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way towards Modern...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lejla Džumhur, Aida Idrizbegović-Zgonić
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Docomomo International 2024-12-01
Series:Docomomo Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://docomomojournal.com/index.php/journal/article/view/457
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850168186403553280
author Lejla Džumhur
Aida Idrizbegović-Zgonić
author_facet Lejla Džumhur
Aida Idrizbegović-Zgonić
author_sort Lejla Džumhur
collection DOAJ
description One of the most striking elements of Dušan Grabrijan’s and Juraj Neidhardt’s oeuvre is the extent and freedom of associations with the contested Ottoman legacy in the first decades of the socialist era in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as seen in their book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way towards Modernity. Such freedom primarily resulted from the increasingly favorable political environment that permitted and encouraged decentralization from the predominantly negative portrayal of the Ottoman past. This paper seeks to unravel the structure and sources of the main discourses used by Grabrijan and Neidhardt in Architecture of Bosnia to deal with the stigma of the Ottoman heritage. We argue that they utilize a certain syncretic language that reflects their own and varied experiences within the Orient-Occident borderline. We assert that their first generating discourse is that of modernism, while the second one revolves around the so-called ‘close neighbor’ or ‘domesticated foreigner’ perspective on the Orient. The premise of Grabrijan’s and Neidhardt’s first position is argued through the parallels of their narrative and the inherent modernist authorization to operate with scientific displacement. The premise of the second position is confirmed through contact nodes with the local differentiated orientalist discourse, which Heiss and Feichtinger (2013) define as distinct in relation to Said’s general concept of oriental Otherness as formulated in Orientalism (1978). In addition to plunging into the dualistic nature of Grabrijan’s and Neidhardt’s work on the lines of modernism and otherness, center-periphery, the conclusions of the paper point to the broader problem of the controversies of the Bosnian and Herzegovinian heritage, where the relationship of modernism towards/with Ottoman heritage is still an underrepresented subject.
format Article
id doaj-art-0d3f3209eeb343f3b6d52a826178d8ef
institution OA Journals
issn 1380-3204
2773-1634
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Docomomo International
record_format Article
series Docomomo Journal
spelling doaj-art-0d3f3209eeb343f3b6d52a826178d8ef2025-08-20T02:21:02ZengDocomomo InternationalDocomomo Journal1380-32042773-16342024-12-017210.52200/docomomo.72.02Authority to Liberate the Ottoman LegacyLejla Džumhur0Aida Idrizbegović-Zgonić1University of SarajevoUniversity of Sarajevo One of the most striking elements of Dušan Grabrijan’s and Juraj Neidhardt’s oeuvre is the extent and freedom of associations with the contested Ottoman legacy in the first decades of the socialist era in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as seen in their book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way towards Modernity. Such freedom primarily resulted from the increasingly favorable political environment that permitted and encouraged decentralization from the predominantly negative portrayal of the Ottoman past. This paper seeks to unravel the structure and sources of the main discourses used by Grabrijan and Neidhardt in Architecture of Bosnia to deal with the stigma of the Ottoman heritage. We argue that they utilize a certain syncretic language that reflects their own and varied experiences within the Orient-Occident borderline. We assert that their first generating discourse is that of modernism, while the second one revolves around the so-called ‘close neighbor’ or ‘domesticated foreigner’ perspective on the Orient. The premise of Grabrijan’s and Neidhardt’s first position is argued through the parallels of their narrative and the inherent modernist authorization to operate with scientific displacement. The premise of the second position is confirmed through contact nodes with the local differentiated orientalist discourse, which Heiss and Feichtinger (2013) define as distinct in relation to Said’s general concept of oriental Otherness as formulated in Orientalism (1978). In addition to plunging into the dualistic nature of Grabrijan’s and Neidhardt’s work on the lines of modernism and otherness, center-periphery, the conclusions of the paper point to the broader problem of the controversies of the Bosnian and Herzegovinian heritage, where the relationship of modernism towards/with Ottoman heritage is still an underrepresented subject. https://docomomojournal.com/index.php/journal/article/view/457ModernismOrientalismColonial HeritageBosnia and HerzegovinaLe Corbusier
spellingShingle Lejla Džumhur
Aida Idrizbegović-Zgonić
Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
Docomomo Journal
Modernism
Orientalism
Colonial Heritage
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Le Corbusier
title Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
title_full Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
title_fullStr Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
title_full_unstemmed Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
title_short Authority to Liberate the Ottoman Legacy
title_sort authority to liberate the ottoman legacy
topic Modernism
Orientalism
Colonial Heritage
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Le Corbusier
url https://docomomojournal.com/index.php/journal/article/view/457
work_keys_str_mv AT lejladzumhur authoritytoliberatetheottomanlegacy
AT aidaidrizbegoviczgonic authoritytoliberatetheottomanlegacy