SPOMENICI POSVECENI RADU I RADNICKOM POKRETU U SOCIJALISTICKOJ JUGOSLAVIJI

Abstract

In this paper I analyze monuments dedicated to labor and the labor movement that were built during the socialist period in the former Yugoslavia. Due to their supposed commemorative character, these monuments have o( en been le( out of scholarly surveys and analyses. A( er presenting an overview of the pre-World War II era labor-themed sculpture in the European and Yugoslav contexts, I will analyze the role of this genre of memorialization in the construction of the o+ cial narrative of social memory in socialist Yugoslavia. ' e three thematic units de" ned in this paper shall be presented through an analysis of selected case studies that point to the speci" city of the conceptual and formal approach to the topic of work and labor in socialist Yugoslavia.

Sanja Horvatincic

Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Zagreb

Sanja Horvatincic

Institut za povijest umjetnosti Ulica grada Vukovara 68/III 10000 Zagreb Hrvatska

[email protected]

U clanku se analiziraju spomenici posve#eni radu i radnistvu nastali u razdoblju socijalizma na podru!ju bivse Jugoslavije, koji su, s obzirom na pretpostavljen komemorativan karakter spomenika, u dosadasnjim pregledima i analizama !esto izostavljani. Nakon pregleda kiparskog tretmana teme radnistva u javnoj plastici u razdoblju prije Drugog svjetskog rata u europskom i jugoslavenskom kontekstu, analiziraju se funkcije tog spomeni!kog zanra u konstrukciji sluzbenog narativa drustvenog sjecanja u socijalisti!koj Jugoslaviji. Pritom su izdvojene tri tematsko-problemske cjeline predstavljene analizom odabranih spomeni!kih primjera koji ukazuju na speci" !nosti idejnog ili formalnog pristupa temi rada i radnistva u socijalisti!koj Jugoslaviji.

Kljulne rijeli: spomeni!ka plastika, socijalisti!ka Jugoslavija, revolucionarni radni!ki pokret, radni!ko samoupravljanje, drustveno sje#anje

Uvod

Upisivanje drustvenog sje%anja i simbola kolektivnih identiteta u javni prostor univerzalna je karakteristika drustvenih ure$enja svih kulturno-povijesnih razdoblja. Kako bi se u"vrstili u sje%anje odre$ene grupe, pojmovi i slike moraju biti predstavljeni u formi doga$aja, osobe ili mjesta i oboga%eni smislom za nju vazne istine, sto se zajedno slijevaju u speci' "ne ' gure sje%anja (& gures of memory) (Assmann 2006: 53). Pronalazimo ih, izme$u ostaloga, u skulpturalnim ili arhitektonskim formama koje se tradicionalno koriste kao e' kasni mediji masovne komunikacije zasnovane na vizualnim obrascima prepoznatljivim unutar zadanog drustvenog okvira. Kada je rije" o spomenicima nastalim u europskom kulturnom krugu, njihova su morfoloska, stilska i ikonografska obiljezja u jednakoj mjeri odre$ena formalnostilskim odrednicama odre$enog povijesnog razdoblja, koliko i ideoloskom motivacijom naru"itelja koji - preferiranjem speci' "ne tipologije i ikonogra' je - na simboli"koj razini uspostavlja ili prekida kontinuitet s prepoznatljivim vizualnim obrascima iz sirokog repertoara i duge tradicije europske spomeni"ke plastike. Imaju%i u vidu transparentnost ideoloskopoliti "ke motivacije imanentne svim spomeni"kim narudzbama i realizacijama, parametre povijesno-umjetni"ke valorizacije tog tipa kiparske/arhitektonske produkcije iz vremena socijalizma neopravdano je uspostavljati isklju"ivo na razini formalno-stilske analize njihovih skulpturalnih ili arhitektonskih elemenata, zanemaruju%i pritom niz kulturoloskih aspekata i drustvenih "initelja, koji "ine osnovu razumijevanja njihove povijesne vrijednosti, ali i suvremene recepcije (Horvatin"i% 2013: 219-221). Spomenike posve%ene radnistvu iz razdoblja socijalisti"ke Jugoslavije potrebno je stoga sagledati kako unutar dijakronijske razvojne linije tog spomeni"kog zanra, tako i u komparaciji s istovrsnim rjesenjima nastalim unutar druga"ijih drustveno-politi"kih ure$enja druge polovice dvadesetog stolje%a. Iako neodvojiv od sireg korpusa jugoslavenske spomeni"ke plastike iz razdoblja socijalizma, taj tematski sklop "ini zasebnu podskupinu, koja se, osim svojim ikonografskim repertoarom, odlikuje i aktivnom ulogom u kreiranju ekonomske i drustveno-politi"ke stvarnosti te speci' "nim mehanizmima aproprijacije novih formalnih mogu%nosti spomeni"kog medija kao agenta prenosenja drustvenog sje%anja. Izdvajanjem karakteristi"nih tematskih cjelina i analizom odabranih studija slu"aja tog tematskog sklopa intencija je ovoga rada da predstavi formalne, ikonografske i koncepcijske speci' "nosti jugoslavenskog iskustva izgradnje spomenika posve%enih radu i radnistvu, uvjetovane drustveno-politi"kim kontekstom jugoslavenskog samoupravnog socijalizma.

Spomenici i tema radnistva do 1945. godine

Svaka epoha, svaki narod ostavio je spomenik koji je ponajbolje prezentirao njegovu povijest, aktivnosti, religiju. On je predstavljao potrebu za a' rmacijom vlastitog ideala i njegovog uobli"enja u skulpturi. Ne%e li "ovje"anstvo, nakon sto je podiglo divne katedrale posve%ene religiji, stupove i trijumfalne lukove u "ast vojnih pobjeda, podi%i i spomenik u slavu rada i kreativne misli, dati obol neumornim radnicima i plodnim misliocima? Mi moramo podi%i ovaj spomenik. On je u dosluhu s mentalitetom naseg vremena, on %e biti njegov najvisi izraz, njegov naj"is%i simbol.1

Masovna praksa postavljanja skulpture svjetovnog sadrzaja u javni, pretezno gradski prostor proizasla je iz iskustva Francuske revolucije kao presedana u koristenju spomenika u procesu ustanovljavanja novih ideoloskih paradigmi, te kao takva "ini jednu od odrednica modernosti europskih drustvenih ure$enja. Iako je rije" o novom obliku drustveno-politi"ke prakse koja podrazumijeva sustavno sirenje "agitacijske i integracijske propagande" (Leith 1991: 3) s ciljem osvjestavanja i formiranja novih nacionalnih, klasnih, rodnih ili kakvih drugih identiteta, sama spomeni"ka forma u pravilu se nadovezivala na tradicionalne morfoloske tipove i ikonografske predloske karakteristi"ne za spomenike religijskog ili monarhisti"kog predznaka (biste, konjani"ki spomenici, alegorijske skulpturalne kompozicije, obelisci itd.).

Prikazi rada i radnistva u mediju javne spomeni"ke plastike - shva%eni kao oblik svjesne, javne reprezentacije radni"ke klase, a ne kao dekorativni arhitektonski element ili dio alegorijskog ciklusa -prvi se put javljaju u devetnaestom stolje%u kao odgovor na industrijsku revoluciju, klasnu strati' kaciju drustva, ja"anje kapitalisti"ke eksploatacije i, posljedi"no, osvjestavanje radni"kog politi"kog subjekta. Me$utim, zbog svoje ideoloske nepodobnosti, ta %e tema u javnoj plastici europskog kulturnog kruga, osobito u razdoblju do Oktobarske revolucije, biti slabo zastupljena. Prvi umjetnik koji uvodi suveren prikaz radnika i radnica u medij spomeni"ke plastike belgijski je kipar Constantin Meunier (Van Gelder 2005: 73), ujedno i autor prvog javnog spomenika posve%enog radu (1980.-1893.). Dok se Meunierova razvedena skulpturalna kompozicija ne odmi"e znatno od dotadasnje spomeni"ke morfologije, model za Spomenik radu francuskog kipara Augustea Rodina (1898.-1899.), zamisljen u formi monumentalne 30-metarske spirale, aluzijom na "beskona"an napredak" (Sanders 1978: 478) kao da nagovjes%uje osnovnu formu projekta za Spomenik tre,oj interancionali Vladimira Tatlina iz 1920. godine. Iako je i Meunierov i Rodinov kiparski prikaz teme i dalje integriran u elaboriranu simboli"ku skulpturalnu kompoziciju, ona sve izrazenije poprima funkciju okvira koji otvara prostor svjesnoj a' rmaciji novog politi"kog subjekta u vidu realistickog tretmana ' gure radnika (Sanders 1978: 479). Zaostravanje socijalisti"kih zahtjeva diljem Europe po"etkom dvadesetog stolje%a dovelo je do situacije u kojoj se Rodinova a' rmacija radnistva ocjenjuje ideoloski nepodobnom, zbog "ega - unato" desetogodisnjem naporu koji je uklju"ivao i me$unarodni apel2 - spomenik nikada nije bio izveden (Sanders 1987: 482). Uporno odbijanje francuske vlade i privatnih investitora da ' nanciraju izgradnju Spomenika radu ilustrira presudnu ulogu ideoloske pozicije i politi"kog oportunizma narucitelja, zbog "ega je tema radnistva u devetnaestom stolje%u bila primarno vezana uz pristupa "nije likovne medije, osobito crteza i gra' ke, koji %e se u liberalno-kapitalisti"kim drustvenim ure$enjima zadrzati kao prepoznatljivi nositelji socijalne i klasno intonirane umjetni"ke prakse tijekom "itavog dvadesetog stolje%a.3

Prije dolaska Komunisti"ke partije na vlast 1945. godine, tema radnistva na podru"ju bivse Jugoslavije nije prisutna u mediju javne spomeni"ke plastike. Motiv radnika ili seljaka do Prvog se svjetskoga rata u umjetni"kim centrima bivse Jugoslavije (Zagreb, Beograd, Ljubljana) pojavljuje u obliku "zanr" scena devetnaestostoljetnog akademizma. Prvi sustavniji kiparski tretman te teme prepoznaje se u "radni"kom ciklusu" Roberta Jeana-Ivanovi%a (1915.-1918), u kojem je uz literarnost klasicisti"ke Myslbekove skole vidljiv i utjecaj spomenutog Constantina Meuniera (Mazuran-Suboti% 2005). Ipak, unato" brojnim pozitivnim ocjenama likovnih kriti"ara, po"etkom 1920-ih godina umjetnik odustaje od prikaza radnistva i okre%e se intimizmu (Mazuran-Suboti% 1999: 12-14), sto je bilo u skladu s op%im poslijeratnim trendom povratka intimnom dozivljaju ili pak realnom, neposrednom opazanju prirode (Proti% 1975: 24). S druge strane, socijalno angazirana umjetnost, potaknuta svjetskom ekonomskom krizom, ostrim klasnim sukobima, ja"anjem fasizma u Italiji i Njema"koj, spanjolskim gra$anskim ratom i umjetnosti Kominterne tijekom "etvrtog desetlje%a dvadesetog stolje%a (Proti% 1975: 26), svoje mjesto nije pronalazila u domeni javne spomeni"ke plastike, koja je u me$uratnoj Jugoslaviji prvenstveno bila u sluzbi a' rmacije nacionalnih ideja, propagande vladaju%e dinastije i izrazavanja pijeteta prema palim vojnicima i zrtvama Prvoga svjetskog rata.4 Tako ni jedini realizirani primjer doma%e spomeni"ke produkcije me- $uratnog razdoblja posve%en temi radnistva, Spomenik rudaru Antuna Augustin"i%a,5 svoje mjesto nije pronasao u jugoslavenskom drustvenom-politi"kom kontekstu, ve% je 1939. godine postavljen u park koji okruzuje zgradu sjedista Me$unarodne organizacije rada u Zenevi, gdje stoji i danas.6

Jednako kao i u ve%ini europskih zemalja, izuzev SSSR-a, za"eci ikonografskih predlozaka i formalnih rjesenja za spomenike posve%ene radnistvu povezuju se sa me$uratnom socijalno angaziranom umjetnos%u, osobito s medijem gra' ke. Najistaknutije mjesto u Hrvatskoj me- $uratnoj umjetnosti zauzima djelovanje Udruzenja umjetnika Zemlja osnovanog 1929. godine s idejama o nuznosti kolektivnog djelovanja i aktivnoj ulozi umjetnosti u drustvenoj revoluciji, koje je sluzbeno zabranjeno 1935. godine (Prelog 2012: 243). Tema radnistva me$u "lanovima tog udruzenja u razli"itim je formalnim izri"ajima prisutna u komornoj plastici Frane Krsini%a, Antuna Augustin"i%a, Vanje Radausa i Petra Smaji%a. Prisutnost umjetni"kih preokupacija srodnog ideolosko-programskog predznaka u me$uratnoj Srbiji vidljiva je kroz djelovanje beogradske grupe Zivot, u kojoj se problemu kiparskog prikaza radnistva posve- %uju Vladeta Piperski i Stevan Bodnarov, dok se u Sloveniji pojava i razvoj te teme povezuje s djelovanjem kipara okupljenih oko Kluba mladih, osnovanog ranih 1920-ih godina (France i Tone Kralj, Tine Kos, Petar Loboda) (Proti% 1975: 26; Baldani 1977: 12-13). Op%enito gledano, u likovnim djelima socijalnog predznaka nastalim u Jugoslaviji "ne zapaza se posebna sintaksa, stil, ve% posebna drustvena i umjetni"ka svijest i ideologija, ugao gledanja, ne na skulpturu ve% na svijet oko sebe" (Proti% 1975: 26). To je za posljedicu imalo i druga"iji kiparski odnos prema prikazu "ovjeka, a time samim time i radnika: "(...) za razliku od prethodnih, sada ga podrazumijeva kao u"esnika drustvenog procesa. Cilj vise nije samo "ovjek kanon, legenda, mit, historija, heroj, ni "ovjek kao individualno odre$ena i psiholoski nijansirana li"nost, ve% i "ovjek kao predstavnik odre$enog drustvenog sloja" (Proti% 1975: 26). S obzirom na nepostoje%u spomeni"ku i razmjerno skromnu skulpturalnu produkciju socijalne i radni"ke tematike prije 1945. godine, valja istaknuti ulogu "siromasnog" medija crteza i gra' ke u a' rmaciji socijalno-angaziranog pristupa temi radnistva (Krsto Hegedusi%, Bozidar Jakac, 5or$e Andrejevi% Kun, Nande Vidmar, Vojo Dimitrijevi% i dr.), koja je stvorila likovne predloske za skulpturalni tretman teme u monumentalnom mjerilu i u tom smislu bila bitan faktor u poslijeratnom razvoju spomeni"ke plastike.

Spomenici radnistvu i politika sjecanja socijalisticke Jugoslavije

Praksa podizanja spomenika u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji re* ektira dvije centralne preokupacije poslijeratnog jugoslavenskog drustva. Osnovnu motivaciju za podizanje spomenika - osobito u ranom pora%u - pronalazimo u spontanoj i uvrijezenoj individualnoj i/li kolektivnoj potrebi obiljezavanja i komemoriranja masovnog stradanja stanovnistva u Drugom svjetskom ratu. S druge strane, uspostavljanjem centraliziranog drzavnog aparata, koje je u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji u razdoblju od 1945. do 1950. bilo pod direktnim utjecajem sovjetskog modela (Kolesnik 2006: 29), javlja se i potreba uspostavljanja sluzbene politike sje%anja kroz institucionalizaciju komemorativnih i slavljeni"kih rituala povezanih s antifasisti"kom borbom. Za njezinu je provedbu od 1947. godine zaduzena krovna veteranska udruga boraca (Savez udruzenja boraca Narodnooslobodila"kog rata) (Osniva"ki kongres 1947: 17-32), "ime komemorativni rituali i izgradnja spomenika postaju dijelom sluzbene jugoslavenske politike sje%anja. Jedan od pragmati"kih ciljeva tog tipa centralizacije sje%anja povezan je s potrebom sirenja ideoloske propagande i legitimacijom novoosnovanog drustveno-politi"- kog poretka pod vodstvom Komunisti"ke partije Jugoslavije, kao klju"nog faktora u izvojevanju pobjede na podru"ju "itave Jugoslavije (Karge 2014: 33-34). Narodnooslobodila"ki rat bio je inherentno povezan s idejom socijalisti"ke revolucije kao osnovom budu%eg drustveno- politi"kog razvitka, sto se tijekom "itavog trajanja Jugoslavije o"itovalo kroz ikonografiju te popratnu tekstualnu i vizualnu dopunu spomeni"ke plastike, poput petokrake zvijezde, srpa i "eki%a te drugih simbola.

Jugoslavensko je politi"ko vodstvo nakon 1948. godine bilo usmjereno prema osmisljavanju vlastitog modela ekonomije i vanjske politike. Dok se vanjskopoliti"ka strategija Jugoslavije, uslijed hladnoratovskih tenzija, zasnivala na balansiranju izme$u Istoka i Zapada te sluzbenom zauzimanju neutralne pozicije kroz Pokret nesvrstanih, problem unutarnje politi "ke ekonomije rjesava se ve% ranih 1950-ih godina uvo$enjem radni"kog samoupravljanja kao eksperimentalnog drustveno-ekonomskog modela.7 Time je stvorena dodatna motivacija da se, pored obiljezavanja zrtava i heroja Narodnooslobodila"kog rata i slavljenja socijalisti "ke revolucije, praksa podizanja spomenika upotpuni naglaskom na identitet radni"ke klase, odnosno a' rmacijom drustvenog sje%anja povezanog s lokalnom tradicijom i protagonistima radni"ke borbe, kao dokazom teznje sirih drustvenih slojeva u ostvarenju klasne i socijalne jednakosti. U tako uspostavljenom narativu, uvo$enje jugoslavenskog samoupravnog socijalizma prikazano je kao ' nalna etapa marksisti"kog vi$enja drustvenog napretka. Stoga su spomenici podizani lokalnim protagonistima klasne borbe trebali svjedo"iti o tesko zasluzenoj politi"koj a' rmaciji potla"enih drustvenih slojeva, ostvarenoj tek uspostavom socijalisti "ke Jugoslavije. Uspostavljenjem direktne veze izme$u socijalisti"ke stvarnosti i revolucionarnog radni"kog pokreta, poticala se samosvijest radnika kao politi"kih subjekata i stvarala pozitivna projekcija budu%nosti, kao jedan od preduvjeta za uspjesnu provedbu jugoslavenskog modela radni"kog samoupravljanja. Time se jugoslavenski spomenici posve%eni radu i radnistvu, osobito oni nastali nakon uvo$enja socijalisti"kog samoupravljanja, znatno razlikuju od istovrsnih primjera tog zanra u zemljama Isto"nog bloka, gdje se od 1948. spomeni"- ka produkcija, osim u velikoj mjeri nametnutim formalno-stilskim obiljezjima socijalisti"kog realizma, odlikovala i koristenjem kanoniziranih prikaza radnika i radnistva.8 Iako nekolicina primjera, osobito oni nastali u razdoblju sovjetske kulturno-politi"ke dominacije, poput spomenika Obnova Lojze Dolinara u Beogradu (1948.), Spomenika obalskim radnicima u Beogradu (1952.) ili Spomenika rudaru Alojza Kogovseka u Ljubljani (1948.-1950.), ukazuju na posezanje za sovjetskim uzorima, spomeni"ki korpus posve%en radu i radnistvu u bivsoj Jugoslaviji u oblikovnom se smislu ne moze okarakterizirati kao socrealisti"ki, s obzirom na to da, kako isti"e Miodrag B. Proti%, "ve%ina autora nastavlja svoju predratnu poetiku koju prilago $ava novoj ikonografskoj osnovi" (Proti% 1975: 27). To je vidljivo ve% i na najranijim primjerima, poput spomenika Ribarima Frane Krsini%a (1946./47.; postavljen u Bakru 1970.), a osobito nakon uvo$enja socijalisti"kog samoupravljanja, kada kiparska traganja za novim formalno-stilskim mogu%nostima rezultiraju novim i raznorodnim oblicima reprezentacije radnistva u mediju spomeni"ke plastike (Dusan Dzamonja, Metalac, Slavonski Brod, 1952.; skulptura je unistena po"etkom 1990-ih godina).

Iako su spomenici posve%eni radnistvu razli"itim intenzitetom naru"ivani i podizani tijekom "itavog razdoblja socijalisti"ke Jugoslavije, tek se 1980-ih godina, u pokusaju cjelovite klasi' kacije i valorizacije spomeni"ke plastike s ciljem njezine zastite i obnove, formira sluzbeni naziv spomeni"kog korpusa: Spomenici revolucionarnog radni"kog pokreta, narodnooslobodila "kog rata i socijalisti"ke revolucije, "ime se i na administrativnoj razini utvr$uje ravnopravna uloga svih triju tematskih cjelina u oblikovanju politike sje%anja kroz medij spomeni "ke plastike.9

Analiza spomenika posve%enih temi rada i radnistva, podizanih sirom bivse Jugoslavije, upu%uje da su njihova narudzba i na"in izvo$enja bili pra%eni trima osnovnima motivacijama: uspostavljanjem narativa o povijesnom kontinuitetu radni"kog pokreta na tlu Jugoslavije, isticanjem neraskidive povezanosti Komunisti"ke partije i radni"kog pokreta, te naglasavanjem u"es%a radni"ke klase u Narodnooslobodila"kom ratu i socijalisti"koj revoluciji. Tematske podskupine tog spomeni"kog zanra uklju"uju spomenike posve%ene: proto-socijalisti "kim temama (poput selja"kih buna i narodnih ustanaka); radni"kom pokretu i istaknutim revolucionarima me$uratnog razdoblja; poginulim ili istaknutim pripadnicima radni"- kih kolektiva u Narodnooslobodila"koj borbi; apstraktnom poimanju teme rada i radnistva. Imaju%i u vidu obilje spomeni"kih tipova i tematskih podskupina, analizu %emo usmjeriti prema izdvojenim tematsko-problemskim skupinama, unutar kojih %emo se analizom dosad neobra$enih primjera usmjeriti na odnos sadrzaja i umjetni"ke forme u izvo$enju spomenika kao medija drustvenog sje%anja, uzroke formalno-stilskog osloba$anja u domeni spomeni "ke produkcije tijekom 1950-ih godina, utjecaj drustveno-politi"ke zbilje i primjene novih strategija sje%anja na na"in prikazivanja rada i radnistva, kao i na promjene u shva%anju drustvene funkcije spomenika u javnom prostoru.

Spomenik rudaru

Prikazi radnika u pravilu su bili povezani s prikazom i a' rmacijom privrednih djelatnosti karakteristi "nih za identitet lokalnih zajednica (metalurgija, tekstilna industrija, brodogradnja itd.), od kojih su me$u najzastupljenijim spomenici posve%eni rudarima, kako zbog velikog broja rudarskih nalazista u bivsoj Jugoslaviji, tako i zbog iznimno teskih uvjeta rada i ekonomske eksploatacije, koji su upravo u tom industrijskom sektoru rezultirali prvim radni"- kim strajkovima. Spomenici su u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji stoga primarno podizani u sje%anje na radni"ke pobune koje su obiljezile po"etak 1920-ih godina i borce-rudare stradale u Drugom svjetskom ratu. Spomenici rudarima u slovenskom Trbovlju i bosanskohercegova"kom Husinu kraj Tuzle, nisu se stoga povezivali samo s lokalnim identitetom i emancipacijom radni"ke klase, ve% su sluzili i kao ideoloski ozna"itelji Komunisti"ke partije kao predvodnice predratnih radni"kih pokreta i pobjede nad fasizmom u Drugom svjetskom ratu.10

Spomenik posve%en husinskim rudarima podignut je 1954. godine na inicijativu samih rudara, Gradskog i Kotarskog odbora SUBNOR-a u Tuzli i "mnogih javnih i kulturnih radnika" (A. H. 1952: 4). Donosenje odluke o ikonogra' ji i formi tog spomenika osobito je zanimljivo. Izrada spomenika povjerena je mladom kiparu Ivanu Saboli%u (Vjesnik 1953) koji je na skulpturi radio uz savjetovanje Antuna Augustin"i%a (Vuji"i% 2001: 226-239) i asistenciju kipara Vjekoslava Ruklja"a i Alfreda Pilca (Vjesnik 1953). Saboli% je ponudio nekoliko idejnih prijedloga spomeni"kog rjesenja:

Jedan predstavlja ruku s krampom, visoku osamnaest metara, koja bi simboli"ki odrazila nesalomljivi otpor rudara protiv neprijatelja. Pred spomenikom bi se nalazio ulaz u grobnicu s relje' ma iz zivota i borbe husinskih rudara. Drugi je prijedlog da spomenik predstavlja rudara s uzdignutom rukom, u kojoj drzi rudarsku lampu, dok mu je preko drugog ramena preba"en smajser. Ta bi ' gura bila visoka osam metara. Postoji i maketa borca koji zabija zastavu na vrh Konjuh-planine, sto se odnosi na poznate stihove: "A navrh planine / Zastava se vije." (A. H. 1952: 4)

Podizanje tog spomenika bilo je od tolikog zna"aja za lokalnu zajednicu da je povodom donosenja odluke o izgledu spomeniku u Tuzli bila odrzana diskusija na kojoj su, "pored javnih i kulturnih radnika, sudjelovali i mnogi gra$ani i predstavnici radnih kolektiva. Zaklju"eno je da spomenik husinskim rudarima simbolizira rudar koji prilikom odlaska u borbu odbacuje kramp, busilicu i lampu i uzima pusku s kojom odlazi u Partizane" (A. H. 1952: 4).

Takav tip participacije lokalnog stanovnistva u odabiru ikonogra' je i forme spomenika indikativan je s obzirom na uobi"ajenu pretpostavku kako se prilikom spomeni"kih narudzbi, osobito onih koje su obiljezile rano pora%e, radilo o ideoloski nametnutim formalnim i ikonografskim rjesenjima. S druge strane, umjetnikov odnos prema spomeni"koj narudzbi ukazuje na uvazavanje lokalne tradicije i suptilno promisljanje o mogu%nostima recepcije domicilnog stanovnistva:

S jedne strane potrebno je uspostaviti kontakt s ljudima u kraju, gdje skulptura nije razvijena, a s druge strane popularna pjesma "Konjuh-planinom" izazvala je kod svakog predodzbu i viziju herojskih doga$aja povezanih s husinskim rudarima, pa prema tome i odre$ena o"ekivanja od skulpturalne realizacije. (...) Mi smo ve% i ranije odrzali sastanke i ja ne mogu opisati s kakvom se ljubavlju rudari i gra$ani Tuzle zanimaju za svaki detalj budu%eg spomenika. (A. H. 1952: 4)

Neovisno o procesu odabira ikonogra' je i simbolike spomenika, Saboli% se primjenom kubiziraju %ih formi i formalno-stilski odmakao od tada prevladavaju%eg akademizma. Njegov umjetni"ki pristup samoj ' guri rudara potrebno je stoga pribrojiti naporima poslijeratne generacije kipara u trazenju vlastitog formalnog izraza pri rjesavanju monumentalne kiparske forme, u "iju je obranu struka prvi put javno stala 1953. godine, povezano s ideoloski motiviranim obijanjem Baki%eva modela za Spomenik Marksu i Engelsu u Beogradu (1951.).11 Svjestan iskustva svog kolege, sam Saboli%, jos za vrijeme rada na spomeniku, isti"e da ce

(m)ozda nekima ova koncepcija biti strana i da se ne%e slagati s takvim prilazenjem problemu. Ali ja to radim iz svog dubokog uvjerenja i na osnovu ranijih teoretskih sukobljavanja s koncepcijom naturalizma, jer sam prakti"ki dosao do zaklju"ka da naturalizam nema veze s monumentalnom skulpturom, sto %e svakako utjecati na moj daljnji rad. (Vjesnik 1953)

Me$utim, do po"etka 1960-ih godina, kada slovenski rudarski grad Trbovlje dobiva prve spomenike posve%ene rudarima, strepnje u vezi ukusa naru"itelja postepeno %e nestajati uslijed kompleksnog procesa uspostavljanja relativno stabilnih i * eksibilnih odnosa Drzave i umjetnosti, koji je u najve%oj mjeri bio izgra$en tijekom 1950-ih godina (Kolesnik 2005: 308). Unato" !injenici da je u domeni spomeni"ke plastike zadrzana legitimna mogu%nost postavljanja otvorenijih ideolosko-pragmati"nih zahtjeva od strane naru"itelja, spomenuti se proces postepeno odrazio i u tom polju kiparstva, pa %e slobodnija primjena individualnih kiparskih poetika rezultirati proliferacijom formalno-stilskih rjesenja i reprezentacijom apstraktnih ideja. Kiparski opus Stojana Bati"a12 posve%en temi radnika-rudara pritom predstavlja jedinstven primjer unutar jugoslavenske spomeni"ke plastike, u kojem su se formalnostilske preokupacije umjetnika do te mjere poklapale s pozeljnom slikom rada i radnistva u javnom prostoru, da su njegove skulpture danas "esto interpretirane kao dekorativna spomeni "ka plastika.13 Me$utim, uzevsi u obzir vaznost rudarstva za identitet lokalne zajednice, kao i premjestanje ' gura rudara 1974. godine u podnozje freske koja uprizoruje razvoj radni"kog pokreta Trbovlja od prvih strajkova, preko Narodnooslobodila"kog rata do socijalisti"kog prosperiteta, u blizinu novopodignutog Bati"evog spomenika posve%enog pedesetoj godisnjici napada na orjunase,14 jasno je da je rije" o skulpturama spomeni"kog karaktera i nedvosmislenog ideoloskog predznaka.

Nakon sto je Rudarski ciklus 1960. godine bio nagra$en Presernovom nagradom15 i sluzbeno a' rmiran od strane likovne kritike,16 Bati"ev egzistencijalisti"ki pristup temi radnistva dobiva "zeleno svjetlo" za koristenje u funkciji javne spomeni"ke plastike. Taj se prikaz rudara dodatno odmi"e od naturalizma i deskripcije, a' rmiraju%i individualnost i slobodu kiparske interpretacije teme, koja se nadovezuje na zapadnoeuropska iskustva poslijeratne moderne.

Bati" je tu sliku vrlo brzo mogao da na$e u svom rodnom rudarskom kraju: nasao je kiparsku ' guru rudara, ali ne individualnog pa%enika ve% karakteristi"nog nosioca svega onoga sto nazivamo "ljudskom kondicijom", nosiocem snage, slabosti i uvjeta ljudskog opstanka na Zemlji. (...) Problem prostora ustupio je sada mjesto problemu raspodjele masa i uravnotezenosti konture koja (...) biva sve "es%e blok, ali blok koji je, zbog svoje materije, ispreplitan ve% gra' "ki shva%enim ornamentima i odozgo opremljen novom konturom glava sa sljemovima, a odozdo postavljen na postolje u vidu lukova ili stapova. (Krzisnik 1977: 54)

Kroz svega desetak godina, prikaz rudara prerasta iz naturalisti"ki-deskriptivnog, tipiziranog spomeni"kog rjesenja socrealisti"ke provenijencije, kakvog pronalazimo u spomenutom Spomeniku rudaru Lojze Kogovseka nastalog krajem 1940-ih godina, do modernisti"ke skulpture koja novim umjetni"kim sredstvima zalazi u kompleksnost pojedina"nog psiholoskog iskustva radnika, uspijevaju%i pritom stvoriti kolektivan, gotovo arhetipski simbol postojanosti i zna"aja lokalne rudarske tradicije.

Spomenik radniku-borcu

Radni"ka participacija u Narodnooslobodila"koj borbi i pruzanju otpora fasizmu jedna je od najzastupljenijih tematskih podskupina spomenika posve%enih radnicima i radnistvu u bivsoj Jugoslaviji. Praksa odavanja po"asti stradalim pripadnicima radni"kih kolektiva bila je uobi"ajena u gotovo svim radnim organizacijama socijalisti"ke Jugoslavije, a, pored potrebe za "uvanjem sje%anja na poginule drugove, njezina je motivacija lezala u javnoj ideoloskoj identi' kaciji s naslije$em antifasisti"ke borbe i socijalisti"ke revolucije. Tipoloski raspon te tematske grupe spomenika izuzetno je velik, a proteze se od spomen-plo"a, preko bisti posve %enih zasluznim "lanovima radnih kolektiva, do spomenika koji su sadrzajno vise povezani s temom stradanja radnika, nego sa samom reprezentacijom radnistva. U nastavku %emo se stoga pozabavit dvama nekarakteristi"nim pristupima toj temi, koji se sustinski razlikuju u razumijevanju mogu%nosti formalne sinteze i drustvene funkcije spomenika.

Spomenik ustanku ili Spomenik palim borcima u narodnoj revoluciji 1941. - 1945. kipara Koste Angelija Radovanija postavljen je 1954. godine17 na ulazu u luku Starog Grada na otoku Hvaru u suradnji s arhitektom Marijanom Haberleom (Maroevi% 1988: 59). U formalnom smislu, spomenik predstavlja odmak od narativne deskripcije koja karakterizira njegove ranije spomeni"ke realizacije. Nakon negacije postamenta sa Spomenikom ustanku u Dreznici (1949.), Radovani rea' rmira klasi"nu spomeni"ku impostaciju uz znatno sazimanje volumena i redukciju deskriptivnih elemenata ljudske ' gure na univerzalne simbole snage i odlu"nosti. Time je omogu%eno stapanje ikonografskih odrednica radnika/mornara/borca u jedinstven simbol otpora lokalnog stanovnistva, u "emu prepoznajemo speci' "nost takvog tretmana radni"ke teme. Njime je zeljeni u"inak postignut i na ideoloskoj razini, semanti"- kim stapanjem pojma radnika i borca u pruzanju otpora i izgradnji socijalisti"kog drustva.

Radovanijev kiparski opus obiljezen je trajnim inzistiranjem na ' guraciji kao osnovom humanisti "kog pristupa spomeni"koj formi, "stoga se moze kazati se njegov o"igledni 'klasicizam' hrani prikrivenim vitalizmom, odnosno da je, zahvaljuju%i prvotnim sastojcima unaprijed cijepljen od svakog tipa akademizma" (Maroevi% 1988: 30). Me$utim, dok prikaz radnikaborca ranih pedesetih godina korespondira s idejom a' rmacije drustveno-politi"kog polozaja radnika u za"ecima samoupravnog socijalizma s jedne strane, i umjetni"kim traganjem za onime sto Vojin Baki% 1950. godine naziva "visom formom" koja bi odgovarala i "nasem novom "ovjeku i vremenu u kom zivimo" (Doji% i Vesi% 2012: 60), "ini se je da njegova trideset godina mla$a, no u formalnom smislu gotovo identi"na ' gura radnika u Brinju (Spomenik brinjskom mineru, 1984.), u znatnom raskoraku sa sve prisutnijom ekonomskom i drustvenom krizom socijalizma. Ipak, Radovanijevo ustrajanje na univerzalno-humanisti"koj poruci ' gurativnog tretmana ljudske/radni"ke ' gure, prema nasem je misljenju pogresno diskvali- ' cirati prema kriteriju "zaostajanja" za novim strategijama medijacije drustvene memorije koje karakteriziraju duh post-modernisti"kog kraja povijesti i velikih narativa. Prije je rije" o svjesnom ustrajanju na modernisti"kom shva%anju kiparskog medija kao sustinske sastavnice spomenika,18 ali i umjetnikovoj osobnoj a' rmaciji kategorije radnika i radnistva,19 koja se, izme$u ostalog, o"itovala u Radovanijevim naporima da kreativne procese umjetni"kog stvaralastva priblizi radni"koj klasi (Angeli Radovani 1976). Promijenjen odnos prema drustvenoj funkciji spomenika u poznom socijalizmu Kosta Angeli Radovani smatra oblikom "prosvije%enog popustanja" umjetnika pred vlastitom drustvenom odgovornos%u. Iako sam priznaje: "Spomenik se mijenja. On moze i nestati, moze postati skola, most, autoput, fond za skolovanja i najnoviji fototermi"ki aparat za rano otkrivanje raka na dojci", autor ne odustaje od nuznosti "oporog, jednostavnog jezika sustine, gotovo tehni"kog" kakav spomenik name %e da bi "sto potpunije prionuo uz sadrzaj i materijal" (Angeli Radovani 2007: 279- 280).

Druga"iji pristup problemu javne odgovornosti spomeni"kog medija pronalazimo na primjeru Spomenika palim Solinjanima - radnicima cementare arhitekata Fabijana Barisi%a, Branka Kalajdzi %a, Duska Duse i suradnika Mate Smaji%a iz 1968. godine (Kova" i Vojnovi% 1976: 152), koji predstavlja jedinstven oblik utilitarnog spomeni"kog rjesenja posve%enog poginulim "lanovima tvorni"kog radnog kolektiva. Modernisti"ki projektiran most svojom se morfologijom referira na tradicionalni arhitektonski tip mlinica na rijeci Jadro, dok koristenjem cementa kao osnovnog materijala autori uspostavljaju semanti"ki odnos izme$u funkcionalnosti objekta, industrijske tradicije lokalnog stanovnistva i sje%anja na poginule radnike (Putovima 1979: 79). Spomen-most duga"ak 33 metra nadopunjen je niskim zidom s prigodnim stihovima Jure Kastelana,20 dok prosiren prilazni plato nosi polu-transparentnu ogradu okrenutu prema rijeci Jadro sazdanu od imena poginulih radnika. Pretvaraju%i praksu "uvanja sje%anja na poginule radnike u poligon urbanog oboga%enja i drustvene integracije Solinjana, autori uspjesno zaobilaze konvencionalne vizualne obrasce povezane s radni"kom tematikom, a spomeni"ku funkciju prenosenja drustvenog sje%anja pronalaze u utilitarnosti objekta i drustveno-integracijskom potencijalu spomen-mosta. Time se u potpunosti brise individualnost umjetni"kog izraza, a povezanost s temom radnistva reducirana je na suptilnu simboliku koja lezi u materijalnosti samog spomenika.

Spomenici radnickom samoupravljanju

Jedna nova drustvena vrijednost dobiva svoje spomenike, vrijednost sto je izrasla iz revolucionarnih kretanja nasega stolje%a i koja se upravo u nasoj zemlji ostvarila u svojoj osnovnoj kvaliteti individualiziranja i vrednovanja svakog "ovjeka putem drustvenog upravljanja. Tako je ono "udno kretanje od "tvorni"ke robe prirode" (u svojim fazama roba, kmeta i proletera) do "ovjeka koji moze i mora vladati svim aspektima svoga bivstovanja posao jedan interesantan put poplo"an spomenicima, koji sami veoma adekvatno registriraju svaku fazu toga kretanja. (am. 1962: 23)

Spomenici posve%eni radni"kom samoupravnom sistemu "ine opsegom manju, no svakako jednu od zanimljivijih tematskih podskupina spomeni"kog korpusa posve%enog radnistvu. S druge strane, nuzno je ukazati na "injenicu da je ideja jugoslavenskog drustveno-ekonomskog modela "esto implicitno prisutna i u spomenicima drugih tematskih podskupina. Njihova izgradnja motivirana je kako uspostavljanjem narativa o povijesnoj teznji lokalnog stanovnistva za ostvarenjem socijalne jednakosti i radni"kih prava, tako i eksplicitnom a' rmacijom novog ekonomskog modela koji u sluzbenom jugoslavenskom narativu predstavlja jedini put prema ostvarenju utopijske projekcije razvoja socijalisti"kog drustva. U formalnom smislu, speci' "nost te grupe spomenika lezi u na"inu na koji je intencija aktualizacije njihova sadrzaja utjelovljena u utilitarno-estetskoj funkciji fontane s jedne, i njezinoj aluzije na tradicionalan simbol izvora zivota i obilja, s druge strane. Spomen-fontane misljene su kao sastavni dio svakodnevice, mjesto susreta, uzitka ili odmora radnika, "ime je njihova forma nuzno podre$ena utilitarnoj funkciji samog objekta. Pored drustveno-kohezijske funkcije, spomen-fontane posve%ene samoupravljanju za cilj imaju i estetsko oboga%enje novih urbanih sredista tipi"no povezanih s industrijskim razvojem gradova, ispunjavaju%i pritom i didakti"ku funkciju javnim posredovanjem ideoloskog sadrzaja novim generacijama korisnika. Spomenici posve%eni samoupravljanju misljeni su, dakle, kao e' kasan medij u ostvarenju programskog cilja "modernizacije sje%anja", koji je u jugoslavenskoj politici sje%anja prisutan od po"etka 1960-ih godina.21

Tu tematsku podskupinu spomenika posve%enih radnistvu predstavit %emo analizom nerealiziranog projekta za Spomenik u "ast radni"kog samoupravljanja Zeljezare Zenica (1961.) i spomen-fontane u Belis%u, koji nosi naziv Sest tvornica (1976.). Inicijativu za podizanje spomenika u Zenici pokrenuo je radni kolektiv tada najve%e jugoslavenske tvornice. Iako je 1961. godine raspisan javni natje"aj, odabrani spomeni"ki projekt, "ija je izgradnja trebala biti ' nancirana donacijama samih radnika, nikada nije realiziran (am. 1962: 23). Projekt arhitekta Zdenka Kolacija i kipara Koste Angelija Radovanija predvi$a urbanisti"ko rjesenje trga ispred ulaza u zgradu zeljezare, u koje je uklopljen bazen s vodom i centralni spomenik. Autori predlozeni projekt spomenika opisuju na sljede%i na"in:

Deset metalnih reljefa utisnutih u betonski masiv - koji nekako asocira svojom egzaktnom pro' lacijom proizvod Zeljezare (traverzu i sli"no) - daju u deset slikan, kao na traci, one sadrzaje koji su u neposrednoj vezi s osnovnim: radni"ko samoupravljanje. Traka se "ita odozdo prema gore, a tim se ritmom razvija i povijest osvajanja te drustvene tekovine, jedne od bitnih karakteristika naseg drustvenog zivota. Ilustrativan je karakter spomenika deklarativan. On nastoji ista%i ulogu rada, osvjestavanje radnika, smisao radni"kog samoupravljanja, njegovih zrtava i ciljeva, kona"no i smisao radni"kog samoupravljanja sredstvima proizvodnje. Zaglavni relje' , najvisi, zavrsavaju sadrzajnu nit koja se provla"i od temelja prema sljemenu spomeni"kog bloka: deveti reljef simbolizira proizvodnju u sluzbi "ovjekovog napretka, a deseti zivot mladih narastaja u svijetu bolje budu%nosti. (am. 1962: 25)

Sli"an tip reprezentacije radni"kog samoupravljanja nailazimo na relje' ma spomen-fontane Sest tvornica u Belis%u kipara Ivana Saboli%a i Jasne Bogdanovi%, gdje je narativ o povijesti razvoja lokalne tvornice i zivotu radnika reduciran na simboli"ke prikaze. S obzirom na to da je identitet grada Belis%a i njegovih stanovnika usko povezan s pokretanjem drvno-preradivacke industrije u devetnaestom stolje%u,22 ali i radni"kim strajkovima koji su obiljezili me$uratno razdoblje (Freitag 1976-1986), kao povod za podizanje spomenika u novom gradskom sredistu odabrana je devedeseta obljetnica osnivanja tvornice i dvadeset peta obljetnica implementacije radni"kog samoupravnog sistema (Z. B. 1976). Restrukturiranjem dotadasnje Organizacije udruzenog rada Belis%e u Slozenu organizaciju udruzenog rada 1977. godine (Belis,e 1977: 6-8), tvornica preuzima novi oblik upravljanja radni"kim kolektivom, sto je posluzilo kao dodatan motiv podizanju spomenika. Sam naziv - Sest tvornica - i oblik fontane - sest niveliranih i me$usobno povezanih kruznih bazena niz koje se slijeva voda - jasno aludiraju na simboli"ki prikaz udruzivanja tvorni"kih postrojenja. Na vanjskim povrsinama fontane reljefno su prikazani stilizirani simboli razvoja tvornice kroz povijest: drveni trupci, razli"iti strojevi za preradu drva, alegorijski prikaz "kulturne nadgradnje" radnika i sl. Za razliku od spomen-mosta u Solinu, koji temu radnistva izrazava simbolikom materijala i funkcionalnos %u objekta, spomenici posve%eni samoupravljanju zadrzavaju narativni aspekt kako bi korisnicima, osobito mla$oj generaciji, na sto razumljiviji, gotovo naivno-didakti"ki na"in uprizorili lokalnu povijest razvitka radni"ke klase i smisao samoupravljanja. Zahvaljuju%i kulturolosko-povijesnoj speci' "nosti radni"kog samoupravljanja, spomenute strategije prenosenja i odrzavanja drustvenog sje%anja s ciljem aktualizacije jugoslavenskog ekonomskog sustava i a' rmacije radni"kog identiteta lokalnih zajednica predstavljaju jedinstvene primjere spomeni"ke plastike, ne samo u jugoslavenskom ve% i europskom kontekstu.

Zakljucak

Spomenici posve%eni temi rada i radnistva predstavljaju jedan od najslabije istrazenih fenomena skulpturalne produkcije druge polovice dvadesetog stolje%a na podru"ju bivse Jugoslavije. Iako u sadrzajnom smislu "ine sastavni dio ideoloski zaokruzenog spomeni"kog korpusa socijalisti"ke Jugoslavije, spomenici tog tematskog predznaka gotovo su u potpunosti zanemareni u ionako rijetkim suvremenim istrazivanjima spomeni"ke plastike i kulture sje%anja u bivsoj Jugoslaviji. Razloge tome pronalazimo kako u ' zi"kom unistenju ili degradaciji velikog broja spomenika posve%enih radu i radnistvu od po"etka 1990-ih godina do danas na podru"ju "itave bivse Jugoslavije, tako i u ideoloski motiviranom ignoriranju ili "estradizaciji" materijalnog i nematerijalnog naslje$a socijalizma, osobito onih elemenata koji u suvremenim drustveno-politi"kim okolnostima sadrze nezeljen potencijal osvjestavanja duge tradicije klasne i socijalne borbe na ovim prostorima. Naime, uspostavljenje narativa o povijesnom kontinuitetu borbe za radni"ka prava i a' rmacija radni"ke klase kao aktivnog politi"kog subjekta bili su klju"ni motivi izgradnje spomenika posve%enih radu i radnistvu u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji. Kao svojevrstan simptom zanemarivanja tog dijela spomeni "ke bastine prepoznajemo i neosnovanu, iako uvrijezenu, pretpostavku o nedostatku kvalitete i originalnog umjetni"kog odnosa prema temi radnistva, koja se u pravilu povezuje s propagandno-agitacijskom agendom socijalisti"kog realizma sovjetskog tipa. Me$utim, ne samo da je razdoblje ruske kulturno-politi"ke dominacije na ovim prostorima bilo kratkoga vijeka, ve% je znatno ve%i utjecaj na na"in prikazivanja radnika u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji imalo me$uratno iskustvo kipara, kako ono tehni"ko-zanatske prirode, ste"eno izvedbom velikih spomeni"kih narudzbi (Augustin"i%, Radaus, Stojanovi%), tako i ono svjetonazorsko, proizaslo iz osobne sklonosti prikazivanja socijalnih tema, koje do 1945. nije bilo mogu%e realizirati u javnom spomeni"kom mediju. Kona"no, uvo$enje samoupravnog socijalizma kao eksperimentalnog drustveno-ekonomskog modela bilo je 1950-ih godina pra%eno jednako neizvjesnim umjetni"kim traganjem za novim formama prenosenja sadrzaja kroz medij javne spomeni"ke plastike. Iako je u hijerarhiji sluzbene politike sje%anja socijalisti"ke Jugoslavije tema radni"kog pokreta bila slabije zastupljena od teme NOB-a i socijalisti"ke revolucije, zbog "ega su spomenici posve%eni tom tematskom sklopu rje$i i u pravilu skromnijih dimenzija, neupitan je kulturoloski zna"aj korpusa u cijelosti, kao i povijesno-umjetni"ka vrijednost pojedinih njegovih primjera. Rije" je o jedinstvenom obliku reprezentacije politi"kog subjekta radnika u mediju spomeni"ke plastike i a' rmacije drustvenog sje%anja na tradiciju radni"ke borbe, kakva je bila nezamisliva u ranijim razdobljima. Dok se neki spomeni"ki tipovi unutar tog tematskog korpusa, u prvom redu biste, odlikuju ponavljanjem konvencionalnih vizualnih obrazaca i "konfekcijskom" kvalitetom, zamjetna je tendencija relativno ranog odmicanja od akademizma, koje rezultira proliferacijom stilsko-formalnih rjesenja tijekom 1950-ih godina i novim promisljanjem tradicionalne spomeni"ke funkcije i tipologije kasnih 1960-ih i 1970-ih godina. Ono se u prvom redu odnosilo na utilitaran tip spomenika, od rjesenja u kojima je tema radnistva svedena na simboliku materijalnosti samog objekta, do spomen-fontana kao mjesta drustvene integracije i odmora radnika. Primjeri analizirani u ovom "lanku ukazuju kako jasna ideoloska motivacija podizanja spomenika posve%enih radu i radnistvu u socijalisti"koj Jugoslaviji nije podrazumijevala nametanje odre$enog tipa ili stilsko-formalnog pristupa spomeni"kom rjesenju. Dapa"e, primjena sirokog raspona raznovrsnih umjetni"kih rjesenja u interpretaciji ove teme upu%uje na potrebu revalorizacije tog segmenta spomeni"ke produkcije na podru"ju "itave bivse Jugoslavije, kako na razini zastite i obnove unistenih ili uklonjenih spomenika, tako i na razini rea' rmacije njihova simboli"kog zna"aja u suvremenom drustveno-politi"kom kontekstu koji se, mozda vise nego ikada ranije, nalazi pred izazovima adekvatnog rjesavanja problema pozicije i prava radnika.

1 Iz javnog apela me$unarodne komisije za izgradnju Spomenika radu Augusta Rodina, 1907. (Sanders 1978: 481; vlastiti prijevod).

2 Me$u zagovornicima izgradnje Spomenika radu isticali su se Léon Cladel, Emil Zola, Victor Hugo i George Clemencau (Sanders 1978: 478). Godine 1907. formira se me$unarodni odbor na "elu s likovnim kriti"arem Armandom Dayotom, koji javno apelira za izgradnju spomenika. Za prijevod dijela apela vidi uvodni citat poglavlja.

3 Iz ovoga su pregleda svjesno izostavljeni spomenici nastali u klju"u fasisti"ke ideologije za vrijeme talijanske okupacije izme$u dva svjetska rata. Jedan od takvih primjera predstavlja kamena skulptura Marcella Maschierinija, koja je krajem 1930-ih godina postavljena na Piazza dell'Impero (Trgu Imperija) u novoizgra$enom rudarskom gradi%u Rasi u Istri. Iako je skulptura povezana s temom rudara-vojnika, intencija takvog prikaza radnika u mediju spomeni"ke plastike ne predstavlja niti drustveno-politi"ku a' rmaciju radnika i radnistva, niti vrsi estetsku funkciju u javnom prostoru grada: "Iako je dvojak identitet pripisan skulpturi zna"ajna sintagma za shva%anje podzemnog poziva kroz povijest, jer se rudari uspore$uju s vojnicima zbog uvjeta rada i konstantnih opasnosti kojima su podlozne njihove profesije, kao i zbog "injenice da je vojska koristila rudare u ofenzivne svrhe posto su iz njihovih redova potjecali najbolji palitelji mina, znalci o eksplozivima, talijanska posveta istome ne%e izvirati iz kvalitativne, pa gotovo i povijesnoetnografske analize radnog dana zaposlenika u ugljenokopima, nego %e biti odraz volje i ideala izrazenih dominantnom Mussolinijevom fasisti"kom krilaticom - credere, obbedire, comba$ ere (vjera, poslusnost, borba). Stoga umjetnost kojom oni obvezuju ima funkcionalan karakter pozivanja na vojnu poslusnost u jami, a ne oplemenjivanje radni"kog dana lijepim. Oni %e biti bezli"na vojska koja se bez pitanja mora podvrgavati ritmu i opsegu rada koju impostiraju nadre$ene im strukture. Iz tog razloga ne "udi da %e nakon pada Italije umjetni"ko djelo prvo biti unisteno, upravo zbog simboli"nog zna"enja koje mu je bilo svojstveno" (Matosevi% 2007: 25).

4 Velik broj spomenika monarhisti"kog predznaka uklonjen je ili porusen za vrijeme okupacije tijekom Drugog svjetskog rata i dolaskom Komunisti"ke partije na vlast. Pritom valja istaknuti da ve%ina njihovih autora svoj angazman i drustveni ugled zadrzava i nakon promjene ideoloske paradigme (Lojze Dolinar, Sreten Stojanovi%, Antun Augustin"i%), zadrzavaju%i u velikoj mjeri i formalno- stilska obiljezja svojih me$uratnih spomeni"kih rjesenja.

5 Augustin"i%ev prikaz rudara pri ' zi"kom naporu, koji na formalno-stilskoj razini prati tradiciju devetnaestostoljetnog akademskog realizma, zapravo je modi' cirana ' gura ustanika kojega je Augustin"i% radio kao dio kiparskog ansambla Spomenika sleskom ustanku za poljski grad Katowice od 1936. do 1939. S obzirom na to da Spomenik nikada nije realiziran u cijelosti, Augustin"i% je ' guru s puskom razradio i dovrsio kao posvetu zagorskom rudaru (Arhiv GGA).

6 Jevgenij Vu"eti", jedna od ikone sovjetskog monumentalnog kiparstva, koji %e 1974. godine u listu Sovjetska kultura Augustin- "i%evog rudara opisati kao "jedno od najveli"anstvenijih umjetni"kih djela u svjetskoj umjetnosti posve%enu umjetni"kom radu" (Slobodna Dalmacija 1974).

7 "Samoupravljanje je zadovoljilo obje potrebe. Ono je pravdalo decentralizaciju privrednog poslovanja na ekonomske jedinice i nize instance vlasti umjesto federalne drzave tako sto se predstavljalo kao 'odumiranje drzave' kao takve, sto je bilo neminovno na putu ka besklasnom drustvu, jer je drzava samo aparat vladaju%e klase nad potla"enim klasama, kako je Marks govorio." Za siru analizu porijekla i motiva za uspostavljanje radni"kog samoupravljanja u Jugoslaviji vidi Unkovski-Korica (2014).

8 Za detaljniju analizu tipova i tematskih cjelina povezanih s reprezentacijom radnika i radnistva u zemljama Isto"nog bloka (Poljska, Ma$arska i Rumunjska) vidi Fowkes (2002: 232-277).

9 Vidi Odbor... (1986).

10 Nakon neuspjesnog pregovaranja oko povisenja nadnica na visinu koja bi odgovarala minimumu egzistencije, 17. prosinca 1920. godine u strajk su stupili rudarski radnici u svim rudnicima Slovenije, da bi nakon "etiri dana otpo"eo i strajk rudara u Husinu i u ostalim drzavnim rudnicima u BIH (Madzar 1984: 17).

11 Prvi znanstveni doprinos razumijevanju zna"aja, kompleksnih kulturno-politi"kih uzroka i dalekoseznih posljedica odbijanja Baki%eva modela za Spomenik Marxu i Engelsu, napravljen u knjizi Izme-u istoka i zapada (Kolesnik 2006: 312-313), nadopunjen je recentnim tekstom "Spomeni"ka plastika Vojina Baki%a" u katalogu izlozbe Vojin Baki,. Svjetlonosne forme (Makovi% 2014: 193-199).

12 Stojan Bati" ro$en je 1925. godine u Trbovlju gdje je odrastao provode%i vrijeme i rade%i u rudniku (vidi Bati" 1977).

13 Usp. Forte (2002: 56).

14 ORJUNA je skra%enica za Organizaciju jugoslavenskih nacionalista koja je u Sloveniji osnovana 1923. godine. Kada je organizacija 1924. godine htjela osnovati svoju podruznicu u Trbovlju, komunisti su protiv njih organizirali oruzani napad (Forte 2002: 66).

15 Rudarski ciklus prvi je put javno predstavljen na izlozbi u Jakopi"evom paviljonu Ljubljani 1959. godine, da bi ve% 1961. godine skulpture rudara bile postavljene u javni prostor Trbovlja (np, 1959.).

16 O Bati"evom Ruarskom ciklusu ekstenzivno je pisano u brojnim "asopisima i dnevnom tisku 1959./60. godine (vidi Arhiv MSUM).

17 Spomenik je bio naru"en od strane lokalnog stanovnistva, a nosi natpis sljede%eg sadrzaja: "Palim borcima u narodnoj revoluciji 1941. - 1945. godine narod Staroga Grada podize ovaj spomenik dana 12.11.1954." (np 1954.).

18 Vidi Angeli Radovani (2007: 237- 280).

19 Radovanijevo u"estalo poistovje%ivanje s ulogom radnika vidljivo je kroz niz novinskih intervjua (vidi Hemeroteka IPU).

20 Rije" je o Pjesmi drugoj iz ciklusa Pjesme o mojoj zemlji: "Lijepa si zemljo moja, kao sloboda, kao o"i tvojih junaka sto i preko smrti gledaju - koliko mrtvih pod tvojim rosnim travama, u grlu tvojih rijeka oni pjevaju - u pjesmi tvojoj oni pjevaju - u prkosu tvome oni prkose - u zivotu tvome oni zive".

21 Referiramo se na zaklju"ke Sestog kongresa Saveza boraca iz 1961. godine koja, prema misljenju njema"ke povjesni"arke Heike Karge, predstavlja svojevrsnu vremensku razdjelnicu u pogledu sje%anja na rat u Jugoslaviji (Karge 2014: 59-60).

22 Grad Belis%e osnovan je 1884. godine pokretanjem drvno-industrijskog poduze%a u vlasnistvu privatne obiteljske tvrtke "S. H. Gutmann". Nakon Drugog svjetskog rata tvornica prelazi u drzavno vlasnistvo kao kombinat za kemijsku i mehani"ku preradbu drveta i proizvodnju strojeva (Ravli% 2013).

MONUMENTS DEDICATED TO LABOR AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT IN SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA

Sanja Horvatincic

Institute of Art History, Zagreb

In this paper I analyze monuments dedicated to labor and the labor movement that were built during the socialist period in the former Yugoslavia. Due to their supposed commemorative character, these monuments have o( en been le( out of scholarly surveys and analyses. A( er presenting an overview of the pre-World War II era labor-themed sculpture in the European and Yugoslav contexts, I will analyze the role of this genre of memorialization in the construction of the o+ cial narrative of social memory in socialist Yugoslavia. ' e three thematic units de" ned in this paper shall be presented through an analysis of selected case studies that point to the speci" city of the conceptual and formal approach to the topic of work and labor in socialist Yugoslavia.

Key words: memorial sculpture, socialist Yugoslavia, revolutionary workers' movement, workers' selfmanagement, social memory

Introduction

/ e practice of inscribing social memory and symbols of collective identity into public space is a universal characteristic found throughout all cultural and historical periods, regardless of which social system organizes a given society. In order to become part of collective memory, concepts and images have to be presented through events, persons, and places as well as infused with the particular collective's idea of important truths; both aspects then create speci ' c ' gures of memory (Assmann 2006: 53). Apart from other contexts, ' gures of memory are found in sculptural and architectural forms that have traditionally been used as successful media of mass communication that speak through visual pa& erns recognizable within a given social frame. If we turn to monuments created within the European cultural circle, their morphological, stylistic, and iconographic features are characterized by both the formal and stylistic determinants of a speci' c historical period, as well as by the patron's ideological motivation. / e patron's preference for a speci' c typology and iconography either establishes or breaks continuity with the recognizable visual pa& erns that are part of the wide repertoire and a long tradition of the European memorial sculpture. Considering the transparency of ideological and political motivations inherent to all commissions and constructions of monuments, the parameters of historical and artistic valorization of this kind of sculptural/ architectural production from the socialist period should not be focused exclusively on the formal and stylistic analysis of their sculptural or architectural elements, but should include those cultural and social aspects that underpin the understanding of their historical value as well as their contemporary reception (Horvatin"i% 2013: 219-221). Monuments dedicated to labor from the period of socialist Yugoslavia should therefore be analyzed both within the context of the diachronic development of this sculptural genre, and in comparison with their equivalents constructed under di) erent social and political regimes during the second half of the twentieth century. Although labor-themed sculpture cannot be separated from the larger corpus of memorial sculpture from the socialist period in Yugoslavia, it does form a discrete subgroup within it. Along with its iconographic repertoire, labor-themed sculpture plays an active role in the creation of economic, social, and political reality. In addition, it is characterized by speci' c mechanisms of appropriation of new formal possibilities of the sculptural medium in order to transmit social memory. Focusing on characteristic themes through an analysis of selected case studies of labor-themed sculpture, this paper aims to show formal, iconographic, and conceptual speci' cities of the building of monuments dedicated to labor and the labor movement in Yugoslavia, conditioned by the social and political context of the Yugoslavian self-management socialism.

Monuments and the Theme of Labor until 1945

Every epoch, every people have le+ monuments that are to the highest degree representative of its history, of its activity, of its religion. It was like a need to a0 rm an ideal and to specify it, with the help of the plastic arts. Will not our epoch leave a monument worthy to summarize our fecund activity? A+ er having elevated admirable cathedrals to our religious faith, columns and arches of triumph to military glory, will not men elevate a monument to the glory of work and to creative thought, an homage to the indefatigable workmen and to fecund thinkers? We must elevate this monument. It corresponds to the mentality of our time; it will be its highest expression, its purest symbol. 1

As a precedent for using monuments in the process of establishing new ideological paradigms, the French revolution brought about the mass practice of placing secular sculptures in public, mostly urban spaces; moreover, this practice has become characteristic of the modernity of European social systems. Although it represents a new form of social and political practice, one that presupposes a systematic expansion of 'agitational and integrational propaganda' (Leith 1991: 3) and aims to form and raise the awareness of new national, class, gender or other identities, the sculptural form itself builds upon traditional morphological categories and iconographic templates that characterize religious and monarchic monuments (busts, equestrian monuments, allegorical statuary, obelisks, etc.).

Representations of work and labor in the medium of public memorial sculpture1understood as a form of conscious, public representation of the working class, and not as a decorative architectural element or part of an allegorical cycle1appears for the ' rst time in the 19th century as a response to the industrial revolution, social strati' cation of classes, intensi' cation of capitalist exploitation, and the consequent awareness of the worker as a political subject. However, due to its ideological unsuitability, this subject ma& er was underrepresented in European public sculpture, especially in the period before the October Revolution. The first artist to autonomously represent working men and women in the medium of memorial sculpture was the Belgian sculptor Constantin Meunier (Van Gelder 2005: 73), who also authored the ' rst public memorial dedicated to labor (1980-1893). While Meunier's elaborate sculptural composition does not represent a signi' cant departure from the memorial morphology of that period, the model for the French sculptor Auguste Rodin's Monument to Labor (1898-1899) envisioned as a monumental 30-meter spiral tower, almost anticipates, with its allusion to 'endless progress' (Sanders 1978: 478), the basic form of Vladimir Tatlin's unrealized project for ' e Monument to the ' ird International from 1920. Although both Meunier's and Rodin's sculptural depiction of labor remain integrated in the elaborate symbolic sculptural composition, Rodin's project additionally creates a framework for a conscious a0 rmation of this new political subject through a realistic representation of the worker ' gure (Sanders 1978: 479). Due to the escalation of socialist demands in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century, Rodin's a0 rmation of labor was deemed ideologically inappropriate; consequently, it was never realized, despite the ten years of planning and the existence of an international petition in support of its construction2 (Sanders 1987: 482). The persistent refusal by the French government and private investors to ' nance the construction of the Monument to Labor illustrates the critical role of the patron's ideological position and political opportunism. For this reason, during the 19th century the topic of labor was tied primarily to more accessible artistic media1especially drawing and graphic arts1 that will remain recognizable carriers of social- and class-consciousness in the art practice of liberal and capitalist societies throughout the 20th century.

Before the Communist Party came to power in 1945, the topic of labor was not present in the public memorial sculpture in the region of former Yugoslavia.3 Until WWI, the motifs of workers or peasants in the art centers of the former Yugoslavia (Zagreb, Belgrade, Ljubljana) appeared only as 'genre' scenes typical of 19th century academicism. Robert Jean- Ivanovi%'s 'workers' cycle' (1915-1918) represents the ' rst systematic sculptural treatment of the theme of work and labor, visibly in* uenced by Constantin Meunier and the literariness of Myslbek's classicist school (Mazuran-Suboti% 2005). However, despite the positive reception of his work by contemporary art critics, at the beginning of the 1920s Jean-Ivanovi% abandons the theme of labor, and turns to intimism (Mazuran-Suboti% 1999: 12-14); a shi+ that was in line with the general post-war turn to either intimate experience or to realistic, immediate observation of nature (Proti% 1975: 24). On the other hand, in the domain of public memorial sculpture of the interwar Yugoslavia there was no space for socially engaged art that was prompted by the global economic crisis, severe class con* icts, the strengthening of fascism in Italy and Germany, the Spanish civil war, and by the art of the Comintern in the 1930s (Proti% 1975: 26). During the interwar period in Yugoslavia, memorial sculpture was used to a0 rm national ideas and the propaganda of the ruling dynasty, as well as to express piety to the fallen soldiers and victims of WWI.4 / is is why Antun Augustin"i%'s5 Monument to the Miner, the only realized example of the local sculptural production during the interwar period dedicated to the theme of labor, remains outside the Yugoslav social and political context; in 1939 it was placed in the park surrounding the International Labor Organization6 in Geneva, where it remains to this day.

In most European countries, with the exception of the USSR, the beginnings of iconographic and formal templates for monuments dedicated to labor can be found in the socially engaged art of the interwar period, particularly in graphic arts. / e leading example of art in the Croatian interwar period is the work produced within the context of the Association of Artists Zemlja [Earth]. / e association, formed in 1929 with the idea that collective practice and an active role of art were necessary for the social revolution, was formally banned in 1935 due to their open ideological agenda (Prelog 2012: 243). / e theme of labor was present within di) erent formal expressions in non-public sculpture, namely, in the works of Zemlja members such as Frane Krsini%, Antun Augustincic, Vanja Radaus, and Petar Smajic. The presence of similar ideological and programmatic artistic preoccupations in Serbia during the interwar period is visible in the work of the Belgrade-based group Zivot [Life], particularly in Vladeta Piperski's and Stevan Bodnarov's treatment of labor in sculpture, while in Slovenia the appearance and development of this theme is found in the work of sculptors that formed in the early 1920s around Klub Mladih [Club of the Young] (namely, France and Tone Kralj, Tine Kos, and Petar Loboda) (Proti% 1975: 26; Baldani 1977: 12-13). Generally speaking, in socially engaged artworks created during the interwar Yugoslavia "one doesn't ' nd a speci ' c syntax or style, but a particular kind of social and artistic consciousness and ideology, a point of view not pertaining to sculpture itself but to the outside world" (Proti% 1975: 26). Such an a& itude resulted in a di) erent relationship of the sculptor towards the depiction of man in general and of the worker in particular: "(...) unlike before, he is now considered part of the social process. / e aim is no longer to present him as a canon, legend, myth, history, hero, or as an individually and psychologically nuanced persona, but rather as a representative of a particular social class" (Proti% 1975: 26). Considering that until 1945 social- and labor-themed production of monuments was nonexistent1and that of social- and laborthemed sculpture relatively modest1it is also worth noting the role of the "impoverished" media of drawing and graphic arts in the a0 rmation of the socially engaged approach to the theme of labor (namely, the work of Krsto Hegedusi%, Bozidar Jakac, 5or$e Andrejevi% Kun, Nande Vidmar, Vojo Dimitrijevi%, among others). Artists who worked in this medium created artistic templates for the sculptural treatment of labor on the monumental scale, and therefore played an important role in the development of the postwar memorial sculpture.

Monuments Dedicated to Labor and the Politics of Memory in Socialist Yugoslavia

The practice of raising monuments in socialist Yugoslavia re* ects two central preoccupations of the postwar Yugoslav society. / e principal motivation behind the raising of monuments -especially during the period following the war1can be found in the spontaneous and conventional individual and/or collective need to mark and commemorate the atrocities of the WWII. On the other hand, with the creation of the centralized state apparatus in socialist Yugoslavia1which was between 1945 and 1950 directly in* uenced by the Soviet model (Kolesnik 2006: 29)1arises a need for the establishment of an social politics of memory by institutionalizing commemorative and celebratory rituals related to the antifascist struggle. Commemorative rituals and the building of monuments became part of the o0 cial Yugoslav politics of memory in 1947, when the umbrella association of the war veterans (Alliance Association of WWII Veterans) (Osniva"ki kongres 1947: 17-32) was put in charge of its implementation. One of the pragmatic goals of this type of centralization of memory is related to the need to disseminate ideological propaganda as well as to legitimate the newly formed social and political order under the auspices of the Yugoslav Communist Party, which was the key and indispensable political factor in the liberation of the Yugoslav territory during the WWII (Karge 2014: 33-34). / e National Liberation War was thus inherently related to the idea of the socialist revolution as the foundation for the future social and political development; until the break-up of Yugoslavia, this idea was manifested in iconography, as well as in the accompanying textual and visual supplements to memorial sculpture such as the five-pointed star, hammer and sickle, and other symbols.

After 1948, the Yugoslav political leadership was focused on conceptualizing their own model of economy and foreign a) airs. Due to Cold War tensions, Yugoslav foreign policy was based on maintaining a balance between the East and West, so that Yugoslavia o0 cially took the neutral position as part of the Non-Aligned Movement. Since the early 1950s, on the other hand, the political economy was organized on the basis of the experimental social and political model of workers' self-management.7 / is created an additional motivation for the inclusion of the working class identity1along with the memorialization of victims and heroes of the National Liberation War and the celebration of the socialist revolution-into the practice of raising monuments. Furthermore, such an information of social memory, connected speci' cally to local traditions and protagonists of the labor movement, was proof of the broader social strata's desire for class and social equality. Within this narrative, the implementation of the Yugoslavian self-management socialism was conceived, from the Marxist point of view, as the ' nal stage of social progress. Consequently, monuments dedicated to the protagonists of class struggle were to a& est to the hard earned political information of the oppressed social strata, realized only with the establishment of socialist Yugoslavia. The direct link between the socialist reality and the revolutionary labor movement promoted the consciousness of workers as political subjects and projected a positive image of the future as the prerequisites for a successful implementation of the Yugoslav model of workers' selfmanagement. In this respect, Yugoslav monuments dedicated to workers and labor1in particular those built a+ er the introduction of workers' self-management1significantly thier from their counterparts built in the Eastern Bloc countries, in which the production of monuments since 1948, in addition to the largely imposed formal and stylistic elements of socialist realism, included canonized depictions of labor and workers.8 Although several examples, especially those created during the Soviet cultural and political domination1such as Lojze Dolinar's monuments Renewal (1948) and the Monument to the Coastal Workers (1952) in Belgrade, or Alojz Kogovsek's Monument to the Miner in Ljubljana (1948-1950)1point to a Soviet in* uence, the larger corpus of plastic arts dedicated to work and labor in the former Yugoslavia cannot be characterized, in the formal sense, as socialist realist, considering that "the majority of authors have retained their prewar poetics, although they have adapted it to a new iconographic foundation" (Proti% 1975: 27), as Miodrag M. Proti% had pointed out. / is is visible even in the earliest examples, such as Frane Krsini%'s Monument to the Fishermen (1946/47; placed in Bakar in 1970), and even more so a+ er the introduction of the socialist workers' self-management, as the sculptors' search for new formal and stylistic possibilities led to new and more diverse forms of representation of labor in the medium of memorial sculpture (Dusan Dzamonja, ' e Metalworker, Slavonski Brod, 1952; the sculpture was destroyed in the early 1990s).

Although monuments dedicated to labor were commissioned and built, with varying intensity, during the entire existence of socialist Yugoslavia, it was only in the 1980s1with the intention of comprehensively classifying and valorizing as well as protecting and restoring memorial sculpture1that this corpus of plastic arts was given its o0 cial title: Monuments to the Revolutionary Labor Movement, the National Liberation War, and the Socialist Revolution, which even on an administrative level points to the equal roles these three subjects have played in the formation of the memory politics through the medium of memorial sculpture.9 An analysis of monuments dedicated to work and labor, constructed throughout former Yugoslavia, points to the fact that their commission and execution was motivated by three basic factors: the construction of a narrative about the historical continuity of the labor movement in Yugoslavia; the importance of the unbreakable tie between the Communist Party and the labor movement; and the emphasis on the participation of the working class in the National Liberation War and the socialist revolution. / ematic subgroups in this sculptural genre include monuments dedicated to: pre-socialist themes (e.g. peasant or national uprisings); the labor movement and prominent revolutionaries of the interwar period; the fallen or prominent members of the workers' collectives in the National Liberation War; and abstract interpretation of the theme of work and labor. Considering that there is an abundance of sculptural types and thematic subgroups, I will limit my analysis to three thematic groups of monuments: monuments dedicated to miners, monuments to workers-' ghters, and monuments to workers' self-management. Using previously neglected examples, I will demonstrate the relationship between content and artistic form in the execution of a monument as a medium of social memory; the causes of the formal and stylistic emancipation of memorials during the 1950s; the role of the social and political reality and the application of new strategies of remembering in the depictions of workers and labor; and changes in the understanding of the monuments' social function in the public space.

Monument to the Miner

Depictions of workers have generally been related to the depiction and a0 rmation of economic activities characteristic for local communities (metallurgy, clothing and textile industry, shipbuilding, etc.), the most common of which were monuments dedicated to miners, both due to a large number of mines in the former Yugoslavia, and also due to extremely hard working conditions and economic exploitation, which led to the ' rst workers' strikes in this industrial sector. In socialist Yugoslavia, monuments were primarily raised to commemorate the strikes that marked the beginning of the 1920s, and to honor the fallen ' ghters/miners in World War II. Monuments to miners in Trbovlje, Slovenia, and in Husino, in Bosnia and Herzegovina near Tuzla, were therefore not only tied to the local identity and to the emancipation of the working class, but were also used as ideological signi' ers of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, seen as the pioneer of the pre-war labor movements and of the victory against fascism in WWII.10 Monument dedicated to miners from Husino was constructed in 1954, following the initiative of the miners themselves, the city and county board members of SUBNOR in Tuzla, as well as "many public and cultural workers" (A. H. 1952: 4). / e process of deciding on the iconography and on the form of this monument is particularly interesting. / e monument was entrusted to a young sculptor, Ivan Saboli% (Vjesnik 1953), who worked on the sculpture under Antun Augustin"i%'s mentorship (Vuji"i% 2001: 226- 239), and who was assisted by two other sculptors, Vjekoslav Ruklja" and Alfred Pilc (Vjesnik 1953). Saboli% o) ered several preliminary proposals for the ' nal monument:

One depicts an arm with a pickaxe, 18 meters high, which symbolically re* ects the unbreakable resistance of the miner against his enemies. In front of the monument would be an entrance to the tomb decorated with reliefs depicting the life and struggles of the Husino miners. / e second proposal was that the monument would depict a miner holding a mining lamp in his raised hand, and an automatic ri* e on his shoulder. / is ' gure would be 8 meters high. / ere is also a model of a ' ghter who is planting a * ag on the mountain Konjuh summit, referring to the well-known verses: "And on the top of the mountain / / e * ag is * u& ering in the wind." (A. H. 1952: 4)

The construction of this monument was so signi' cant to the local community that they organized a public forum in Tuzla, in order to discuss the ' nal version of the monument. / e participants in the discussion included "public and cultural workers, as well as many citizens and representatives of workers' collectives. / ey decided that the monument to Husino miners symbolizes a miner who abandons the pickaxe, the drill, and the lamp, and takes a ri* e to join the Partisans" (A. H. 1952: 4).

The participation of the local population in the selection of the appropriate iconography and form of the monument is indicative, considering the customary assumption that the commission of monuments1especially in the immediate postwar period1entailed ideologically imposed formal and iconographic dictates. On the other hand, the artist's relationship towards the commission of the monument points to an appreciation of the local tradition and a subtle re* ection on the possibilities of the local population's reception of the monument:

On the one hand, it is necessary to build a rapport with the people in the region where sculpture isn't developed; and on the other hand, the popular song "On the Konjuh Mountain" produced in everybody the idea and the vision of heroic events related to Husino miners, and therefore certain expectations concerning the sculptural realization. (...) We had met earlier and I cannot describe how ardently the miners and citizens of Tuzla are interested in every detail of the future monument. (A. H. 1952: 4)

Regardless of the process of choosing the monument's iconography and symbolism, Saboli%, by using cubist forms, formally and stylistically departs from the dominant academicism of the time. His artistic approach to the ' gure of the miner should therefore be interpreted in the context of the search among the post-war generation of sculptors for their own formal expression in the medium of monumental sculpture. / eir e) ort was publicly defended by a part of the professional establishment in 1953, when their protagonists reacted critically to the ideologically motivated rejection of Vojin Baki%'s model for the Monument to Marx and Engels in Belgrade (1951).11 Aware at the time of his colleague's experience, while working on the monument, Saboli% stated that

[P]erhaps some will consider this conceptualization as foreign and will not agree with such an approach to the problem. But my motivation stems from a personal and deep belief and is based on my previous theoretical con* ict with the concept of naturalism; because I have practically come to a conclusion that naturalism has no connection to memorial sculpture, and this [insight] will de' nitely a) ect my future work. (Vjesnik 1953)

However, until the beginning of the 1960s, when the ' rst monuments to miners were constructed in the Slovenian mining town of Trbovlje, concerns over the state commissioners' taste will gradually diminish, due to the complex process of establishing a relatively stable and * exible relationship between the State and the artist, which was for the most part formed during the 1950s (Kolesnik 2005: 308). Despite the fact that it was possible for the commissioner to make ideological and pragmatic demands in the domain of memorial sculpture, the aforementioned process was gradually being re* ected in this type of sculptural production as well, leading to more liberal applications of individual sculptural poetics that resulted in the proliferation of formal and stylistic solutions and representations of abstract ideas. Stojan Bati"'s12 sculptural oeuvre dedicated to the worker-miner represents a unique example within the Yugoslav memorial sculpture, where the artist's formal and stylistic preoccupations align with the desirable image of work and labor in public space to an extent that today his works are o+ en interpreted as decorative memorial sculpture.13 However, considering the importance of mining to the local community's identity, and the 1974 relocation of the sculptures of miners to a location close to Bati"'s new monument dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the a& ack on the members of ORJUNA141as well their placement at the base of a fresco depicting the development of the labor movement in Trbovlje from the ' rst workers' strikes and the National Liberation War to socialist prosperity1it is clear that these sculptures have a monumental character and an unambiguous ideological background.

A+ er the Mining Series had won the Presern award15 in 1960 and had o0 cially been a0 rmed by art critics,16 Bati"'s existential approach to the topic of labor was ' nally deemed an appropriate form for a public memorial sculpture. / is depiction of a miner is further removed from descriptive naturalism, a0 rming the sculptor's individuality and freedom of interpretation of subject ma& er, aligning it thus with the principles of the postwar modernism in Western Europe.

Bati" could very quickly locate this image in his birthplace, which is known for mining: he found it in a sculptural representation of a miner, not as someone who su) ers, but as someone who is a characteristic bearer of all that we call "human condition," the carrier of strength, of weakness, and of the conditions for human survival on Earth. (...) / e problem of space was now replaced with the problem of distributing the volumes and balancing the contour that (...) even more so turns into a block, but a block that is, because of its materiality, already interwoven with graphically conceived ornaments and equipped, from above, with a new contour of a head with a helmet, and from below placed on a mount consisting of arches and poles .(Krzisnik 1977: 54)

In the period of only ten years, the depiction of a miner in Slovenia transformed from a naturalistic and descriptive, standardized sculptural solution of the socialist realism provenance 1which can be found in the above mentioned Lojze Kogovsek's Monument to the Miner, constructed in the late 1940s1into a modern sculpture that uses new artistic means to dive into the complexity of the worker's individual psychology, thereby creating a collective, almost archetypal symbol of continuity and meaning of the local mining tradition.

Monument to the Worker-Fighter

/ e participation of workers in the National Liberation War and their resistance to fascism represents one of the most common thematic subgroups of monuments dedicated to work and labor in the former Yugoslavia. / e practice of paying respect to the fallen members of the worker collectives was common in all labor organizations in socialist Yugoslavia. It was simultaneously motivated by the need to remember their killed comrades and by the o0 cial public ideological identi' cation with the legacy of the antifascist struggle and the socialist revolution. / e typological range of this thematic subgroup is extremely wide, spanning from memorial plaques and busts dedicated to the distinguished members of worker collectives to monuments that are thematically more related to the su) ering of the workers during the war than to the representation of labor as such. / erefore, in the following section I will focus on two uncharacteristic approaches to this theme, which essentially diverge in their understanding of the possibilities of a formal synthesis and the social function of monuments.

/ e sculptor Kosta Angeli Radovani's Monument to the Uprising or ' e Monument to the Fallen Fighters in the Peoples' Revolution 1941 - 1945, constructed in collaboration with the architect Marijan Haberle, was placed at the port entrance in Stari Grad, Hvar in 195417 (Maroevi% 1988: 59). Formally, the monument represents a departure from the narrative description characteristic of his earlier sculptural works. A+ er negating the pedestal in the Monument to the Uprising in Dreznica (1949), Radovani now rea0 rms the classical pedestal, accompanied, however, with the reduction of volumes and descriptive elements of the human ' gure to the universal symbols of human strength and determination. / is allowed Radovani to merge the iconographic determinants of worker/sailor/' ghter into a singular symbol of the local resistance, a solution that represents a unique approach to the theme of labor. Moreover, by semantically joining the worker and ' ghter into a single ' gure of resistance leading to the creation of the new, socialist society, Radovani also achieved the desired e) ect at the ideological level.

Radovani's sculptural oeuvre is marked by an ongoing insistence on ' guration as the basis for a humanistic approach to the sculptural form, "so it can be said that his apparent 'classicism' is sustained by his covert vitalism; in other words, that it is, due to its original ingredients, already immune from any kind of academicism" (Maroevi% 1988: 30). Although his representation of the worker-' ghter from the early 1950s is in line with the a0 rmation of the worker's social and political position at the inception of the socialist self-management system, on the one hand, and with what Vojin Baki% in 1950 has called "a higher form" suitable for "our new man and for the time in which we live" (Doji% i Vesi% 2012: 60) on the other, his later, but formally almost identical sculpture of the worker in Brinje (Monument to the Miner % om Brinje, 1984), appears incongruous against the increasingly evident economic and social crisis of socialism in the 1980s. However, Radovani's insistence on the universal and humanistic message represented in the ' gurative approach to the human/worker ' gure should not be disquali' ed based on its "delay" with respect to the new strategies of mediation of social memory, exempli' ed by the postmodernist insistence on the end of history and grand narratives. It is more likely that we are dealing with a conscious insistence on a modernist understanding of the sculptural medium as the essential part of a monument,18 and with a personal investment in the categories such as "worker" and "labor,"19 which was manifested through Radovani's a& empts to bring artistic creation closer to the working class (Angeli Radovani 1976). Kosta Angeli Radovani sees the shi+ in the social function of monuments that marked late socialism as the artist's "enlightened relaxation" of his social responsibility. Although he himself admits that: "A monument changes. It can also disappear, become a school, a bridge, a highway, an educational fund, or the newest phototermic machine for the early detection of breast cancer;" the author keeps emphasizing the necessity of the "sharp, simple, almost technical language of the essence," that the monument itself imposes in order to "more fully adhere to its content and material" (Angeli Radovani 2007: 279-280).

A di) erent approach to the problem of public responsibility with respect to the medium of sculpture is found in ' e Monument to the Fallen Citizens of Solin - Cement Factory Workers, constructed by the architects Fabijan Barisi%, Branko Kalajdzi%, Dusko Dusa and collaborator Mate Smaji% in 1968 (Kova" i Vojnovi% 1976: 152). / is monument represents a unique example of a utilitarian sculptural solution dedicated to the fallen members of the factory's worker collective. / e modernist bridge morphologically corresponds to the traditional mills on the Jadro River, while the use of cement as the primary material establishes a semantic relationship between the functionality of the object, the industrial tradition of the local populace and the memory of the fallen workers (Putevima 1979: 79). A low wall bearing a ' & ing poem by Jure Kastelan20 completes the 33-meter long memorial bridge, while the widened entrance plateau carries a semi-transparent memorial wall facing the river Jadro, built out of the names of the fallen workers. By transforming the practice of remembering the fallen workers into a terrain for urban development and social integration of the citizens of Solin, the authors successfully evaded the conventional visual pa& erns associated with the theme of labor, discovering the commemorative function of transmi& ing social memory through the utility of the object itself, as well as in the potential for social integration that the memorial bridge creates. / is solution completely erases individual artistic expression, while reducing the theme of labor to a subtle symbolism that lies in the materiality of the monument itself.

Monuments Dedicated to Workers' Self-Management

A new social value is being commemorated through monuments, the value that arose from the revolutionary currents of our century and that was realized precisely in our country in its essential quality as the individuation and valuation of every man through social management. So the transformation from a "factory commodity nature" (through di) erent phases of being a slave, serf, and proletarian) to a man who can and must govern all aspects of his being has passed through an interesting path paved with monuments, which themselves adequately register every phase of that movement. (am. 1962: 23)

Monuments dedicated to the system of workers' self-management form a smaller, but nonetheless interesting, thematic subgroups within the corpus of monuments dedicated to work and labor. However, it is necessary to emphasize the fact that the concept of the Yugoslav socio-economic model is o+ en implicitly present in monuments belonging to other thematic subgroups. / ey were constructed in order to establish a narrative of the local population's historical aspiration to achieve social equality and workers' rights and to explicitly a0 rm the new economic model, which as part of the o0 cial Yugoslav narrative represents the only path of achieving a utopian projection of the development of a socialist society. In the formal sense, the speci' city of this subgroup of monuments lies in the way that the intention of actualizing their content is embodied in the utilitarian and aesthetic function of the fountain on one hand, and in the allusion to the traditional symbol of life and abundance that it projects, on the other. Memorial fountains were considered an integral component of everyday life as a place for meetings, leisure, and rest, which necessarily led to the subordination of their form

to a utilitarian function. Apart from encouraging social cohesion, memorial fountains dedicated to the workers' self-management were also meant to aesthetically enrich new urban centers, typically connected to the industrial development of cities, as well as to ful' ll their didactic function of publicly mediating their ideological content to the new generations of users. Monuments dedicated to workers' self-management were therefore conceptualized as an e0 cient medium for realizing the programmatic agenda of "modernizing memory," which was present in the Yugoslav politics of memory since the early 1960s. 21

I will present this thematic subgroup of monuments dedicated to work and labor through the analysis of an unrealized project for ' e Monument in Honor of the Zenica Ironworks Workers' Self-management (1961) and the memorial fountain in Belis%e, titled Six Factories (1976). / e initiative to build a monument in Zenica was started by the worker collective of the largest Yugoslav factory at the time. Although a public competition was announced in 1961, the selected sculptural project1which was supposed to be funded by workers' donations1was never realized (am. 1962: 23). / e architect Zdenko Kolacio and the sculptor Kosta Angeli Radovani envisioned an urban plan for the public square in front of the entrance to the main building of the ironworks that would include a pool of water and a central memorial. / e authors describe the project proposal as follows:

Ten metal reliefs imprinted on a cement block1whose exact pro' ling evokes an ironworks product (a traverse or a similar object)1represent through ten images, as in a factory line, the content which is immediately related to the base: workers' self-management. / e line is read from bo& om up, just as the history of acquiring this social legacy [workers' selfmanagement], one of the crucial characteristics of our social life, is developed along the same rhythm. / e illustrative character of the monument is declarative. Its aim is to emphasize the role of work, worker's consciousness, the meaning of workers' self-management through means of production. / e head reliefs, which occupy the highest position, conclude the thematic thread that extends from the base to the ridge of the monumental block: the ninth relief symbolizes production in the service of human progress, while the tenth relief represents the life of the younger generations in a world of be& er future. (am. 1962: 25)

A similar type of representation of workers' self-management can be found on the reliefs decorating ' e Memorial Fountain Six Factories in Belis%e, where the historical narrative of the factory and the life of the workers are reduced to symbolic representations. Since the identity of Belis%e and its citizens is closely connected to the development of the woodworking industry in the 19th century,22 but also to workers' strikes that marked the interwar period (Freitag 1976-1986), the motivation for the raising monuments in the new city center was the 90th anniversary of the factory's founding, and the 25th anniversary of the implementation of the system of workers' self-management (Z. B. 1976). With the restructuring of the Organization of Associated Labor Belis%e into the Composite Organization of Associated Labor in 1977 (Belis,e 1977: 6-8), the factory takes on a new system of managing the worker collective, which provided an additional motivation for the raising of monuments. / e title 1Six Factories1as well the form of the fountain1six leveled and mutually connected circular pools * owing with water1clearly symbolize the joining of the factory's manufacturing plants. / e outer surfaces of the fountain are decorated with reliefs depicting the stylized symbols of the factory's development through history: wooden logs, di) erent machinery for wood processing, an allegory depicting the "cultural superstructure" of workers, etc. Unlike the memorial bridge in Solin, which illustrates the theme of labor through the symbolic meaning of the material and the functionality of the object, monuments dedicated to worker self-management retain their narrative aspect in order to relate1in an easily understandable, almost naive and didactic manner1to its users, particularly to the younger generation, the local history of the working class and the essence of workers' self-management system. Due to the cultural and historical speci' city of workers' self-management, these strategies of transfer and maintenance of social memory1whose aim was to actualize the Yugoslav economic system and to a0 rm the worker identity in local communities1represent unique examples of memorial sculpture, not only in the Yugoslav but also in the wider European context.

Conclusion

Monuments dedicated to work and labor represent one of the least explored phenomena of the sculptural production during the second half of the 20th century in the former Yugoslavia. Although in terms of their content, they form an integral part of the socialist Yugoslav ideologically heterogeneous sculptural corpus, monuments to labor are almost completely disregarded in the already sparse contemporary scholarship on memorial sculpture and culture of memory in the former Yugoslavia. Reasons for this can be found both in the physical destruction or degradation of many monuments dedicated to work and labor1starting in the early 1990s and continuing to this day on the entire territory of the former Yugoslavia1 and in the ideologically motivated neglect or "vulgarization" of the tangible and intangible socialist heritage1in particular of those elements that in the contemporary social and political circumstances carry the unwanted potential for raising awareness of the long tradition of the class and social struggle that marks this region. Namely, establishing a narrative of historical continuity of the struggle for workers' rights and the a0 rmation of the working class as an active political subject were key motivators for the building of monuments dedicated to work and labor in socialist Yugoslavia. / e unfounded, although habitual assumption that these monuments are of poor quality and that they lack the original artistic approach to the theme of labor, generally associated with the agenda of propaganda and agitation in Soviet socialist realism, appears as speci' c symptom of neglect of this memorial heritage. However, not only was the period of Russian cultural and political domination in this region short lived, but also the depictions of workers in socialist Yugoslavia were far more in* uenced by the sculptors' interwar experience1in the technical and vocational sense as acquired through commissions of large monuments (Augustin"i%, Radaus, Stojanovi%), as well as at the level of ideology, arising from individual tendencies to represent socially relevant themes, which until 1945 could not be realized in the medium of public sculpture. Finally, in the 1950s the introduction of worker self-management system, an experimental social and economic model, was followed by the equally uncertain artistic search for new forms of transmi& ing content through the medium of public memorial sculpture. Although in the hierarchy of the o0 cial politics of memory in socialist Yugoslavia the labor movement received less a& ention that the National Liberation War or the socialist revolution1which is also the reason why there are fewer monuments related to this theme, and those few that do exist are generally of more modest dimensions1the cultural signi' cance of the entire corpus, as well as the historical and artistic value of its particular pieces, is unquestionable. We are dealing with a unique form of representing the worker as a political subject in the medium of memorial sculpture and of a0 rming the memory contained in the tradition of the workers' struggle, one that was unimaginable prior to this period. Although several types of monumental representations within this thematic corpus1primarily busts1are marked by a repetition of conventional visual pa& erns and a "ready-made" quality, a tendency to move away from academicism is noticeable relatively early on, leading to a proliferation of stylistic and formal solutions during the 1950s, and to a new re* ection on the traditional function and typology of monuments during the 1960 and 1970s. / ese were primarily related to the utilitarian quality of the sculptures, ranging from solutions that reduced the theme of labor to the materiality of the object itself to memorial fountains as places of social integration and rest for workers. / e examples analyzed in this paper show that a clear ideological motivation for raising monuments dedicated to work and labor in socialist Yugoslavia did not necessarily include the imposition of stylistic or formal approaches to sculpture. In fact, the wide range of artistic solutions in the sculptural interpretation of this theme points to a need for revaluation of this segment of memorial production on the territory of the entire former Yugoslavia, with respect to conservation and restoration of either destroyed or removed monuments, and with respect to rea0 rmation of their symbolic meaning in the contemporary social and political context that is now, perhaps more than ever before, faced with the challenge of ' nding an adequate solution to the problem of the position and rights of workers.

1 From the international comi& ee's manifesto to build Auguste Rodin's Monument to labor, in 1907. (Sanders 1978: 481).

2 Supporters of the construction of the Monument to Labor included Léon Cladel, Emil Zola, Victor Hugo, and George Clemencau (Sanders 1978: 478). In 1907, an international comi& ee headed by the art critic Armand Dayot was formed, seeking both national and international support for the construction of the monument. / is chapter is prefaced with a quote from their petition.

3 / e monuments built under the in* uence of fascist ideology during the interwar Italian occupation were consciously le+ out of the analysis. One such example is Marcello Maschierini's stone sculpture, which was placed in Piazza dell'Impero (Imperial Square) at the end of the 1930s, in the mining town of Rasa. Although the sculpture evokes the ' gure of the miner-soldier, the intention of such a representation of the worker in the medium of memorial sculpture does not represent neither the social and political a0 rmation of the workers and labor nor does it have an aesthetic function in the public space of the city: "Although the dual identity ascribed to the sculpture is an important syntagm for understanding the underground vocation throughout history, since the miners are compared to soldiers due to their working conditions and constant dangers that their professions entail, and since the military used miners in their o) ensives due to their experience in se& ing o) mines and their knowledge of explosives, the Italian commemoration of miners does not originate in the qualitative or even an historic-ethnographic analysis of a miner's workday, but is a re* ection of the will and the ideal expressed in Mussolini's dominant fascist phrase-credere, obbedire, comba$ ere (believe, obey, ' ght). Consequently, the art that is created under this fascist dictum has a functional character of calling for military obedience in the pit, and not of adding beauty to the worker's day. / ey will be a faceless army that has to unquestionably submit to the rhythm and volume of work imposed by the governing structures. It is therefore not surprising that a+ er the fall of Italy the work of art was the ' rst to be destroyed, precisely because of the symbolic meaning inherent to it" (Matosevi% 2007: 25).

4 Many monuments dedicated to the Yugoslav monarchy were either removed or destroyed during the occupation or a+ er the Communist Party came to power. It is worth noting that the majority of the artists kept both their social engagement and reputation even a+ er the ideological paradigm had changed (Lojze Dolinar, Sreten Stojanovi%, Antun Augustin"i%), and continued with the same formal and stylistic approaches to memorial sculpture in in the interwar period.

5 Augustin"i%'s depiction of a laboring miner, which formally and stylistically follows the tradition of the 19th century academic realism, actually represents a modi' ed version of an insurgent on which Augustin"i% was working as part of a collection of Monuments to the Silesian Uprising in the Polish town of Katowice between 1936 and 1939. Considering that the monument was never fully realized, Augustin"i% used the ' gure with a ri* e and reworked it as a dedication to a miner from the Zagorje region (GGA Archives)

6 In 1974 Jevgenij Vu"eti", one of the icons of Soviet monumental sculpture, described Augustin"i%'s miner, in the journal Soviet culture, as 'one of the most magni' cent artworks in world art dedicated to artistic work' (Slobodna Dalmacija 1974).

7 "Self-management ful' lled both needs. It provided a justi' cation for the decentralization of economy and business into economic units that were under local, instead of federal control; and it was represented as the 'withering away of the state' as such, which was necessary for the creation of a classless society, since, as Marx says, the state is nothing but the apparatus of the ruling class over the oppressed classes." For a broader analysis of the origin and motives for implementing worker self-management in Yugoslavia (see: Unkovski-Korica 2014).

8 For a detailed analysis of the types and themes related to the representation of workers and labor in the countries of the Eastern Block (Poland, Hungary, and Romania) (see Fowkes 2002: 232-277).

9 See Odbor... (1986).

10 A+ er a failed negotiation over an increase in wages to the level of a minimum living wage, miners in all Slovenian mines started a strike on 17 Dec 1920; four day later, the miners in Husin and other state mines in Bosnia and Herzegovina also started their strike (Madzar 1984: 17).

11 The ' rst signi' cant contribution to the understanding of the meaning, the complex cultural and political causes as well as the far-reaching consequences of the refusal of Baki%'s model for the Monument to Marx and Engels was presented in the book Izme-u istoka i zapada (Kolesnik 2006: 312-313), and appended recently with the article "Spomeni"ka plastika Vojina Baki%a [Vojin Baki%'s Memorial Sculpture]," published in the catalogue for the exhibition "Vojin Baki%. Svjetlonosne forme" [Vojin Baki%. Luminous Forms] (Makovi% 2014: 193-199).

12 Stojan Bati" was born in 1925 in Trbovlje, where he worked and spent much time in a mine (see Bati" 1977).

13 Cf. Forte (2002: 56).

14 ORJUNA is an acronym for the Organization of Yugoslav Nationalists, which was formed in Slovenia in 1923. When the organization wanted to form its subsidiary in Trbovlje in 1924, communists organized an armed a& ack against them. Forte 2002: 66.

15 The Mining Series was publicly presented for the ' rst time at the exhibition in the Jakopi"'s pavillion in Ljubljana in 1959: in 1961 the sculptures were placed in a public space in Trbovlje (np, 1959).

16 Batic's Mining Series received a lot of media a& ention in magazines and newspapers in 1959 and 1960. (see: MSUM Archives).

17 Members of the local community commissioned the monument. / e inscription contains the following words: '/ e people of Stari Grad on the day 12 November 1954 raise this monument to the ' ghters fallen in the People's Revolution 1941 - 1945.' (np 1954).

18 See Angeli Radovani (2007: 237-280).

19 Radovani's frequent identi' cation with the role of a worker is seen in many interviews he gave to the newspapers (see Hemeroteka IPU).

20 / e poem in question is the second poem in the collection Pjesme o mojoj zemlji/Poems About my Country: "My country you are as beautiful as freedom, as the eyes of your heroes who see beyond the grave1how many dead lie below your wet grasses, in the gullet of your rivers they sing1in your song they sing1spiteful in your spite1inside your life they live."

21 I refer to the conclusions of the Sixth congress of the Association of Fighters in 1961, which, according to the historian Heike Karge, represents a kind of a temporal boundary in terms of remembering the war in Yugoslavia (Karge 2014: 59 -60).

22 / e town of Belis%e was founded in 1884 with the start of the woodworking factory owned by a private family company S. H. Gutmann. A+ er WWII the ownership of the factory was transfered to the state, which turned it into a combinate for chemical and mechanical processing of wood and production of machinery (Ravli% 2013).

LITERATURA / REFERENCES

am. "Spomenik u "ast samoupravljanja Zeljezare Zenica". 1962. Arhitektura 3-4.

Angeli Radovani, Kosta. 1976. "Angazman kao kriterij". Ve"ernji list, 3.srpnja.

Angeli Radovani, Kosta. 2007. "Lutanja izme$u dobrih i losih spomenika". U/In Izme-u proroka i radnika. Ogledi o stolje,u hrvatskoga kiparstva / Kosta Angeli Radovani. I. Simat Banov, ur/ed. Zagreb: Erasmus naklada.

Assmann, Jan. 2006. "Kulturno sje%anje". U/In Kultura pam,enja i historija. M. Brklja"i% i/and S. Prlenda, ur/ed. Zagreb: Golden marketing - Tehni"ka knjiga.

Baldani, Juraj. 1977. "Jugoslavensko angazirano socijalno i revolucionarno kiparstvo". U/In Revolucionarno kiparstvo. D. Zduni%, ur/ ed. Zagreb: Spektar.

Doji%, Zorana i Jelena Vesi%. 2012. Politi"ke prakse (post)jugoslovenske umetnosti: retrospektiva 01. Beograd: Prelom kolektiv.

Forte, Aleksandra. 2002. Spomeniki Zasavja. Hrasnik, Trbovlje, Zasavlje. Trbovlje: Zasavski muzej Trbovlje.

Fowkes, Reuben. 2002. Monumental Sculpture in Post-War Eastern Europe, 1945-1960 (/ esis Ph.D.). Essex: University of Essex.

Frajtag, Zdenka, ur/ed. 1976-1986. Godisnjak: glasilo Muzeja u Belis,u 1-8, Belis%e: Drustvo prijatelja starina.

Horvatin"i%, Sanja. 2013. "Prijedlog modela problemske analize spomeni"ke plastike iz razdoblja socijalizma". Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti 37: 217-228.

Karge, Heike. 2014. Sje,anje u kamenu - okamenjeno sje,anje. Beograd: Bibilioteka XX vek.

Kolesnik Ljiljana. 2006. Izme-u istoka i zapada. Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti.

Kolesnik, Ljiljana. 2005. "Prilozi interpretaciji hrvatske umjetnosti 50ih godina. Prikaz formativne faze odnosa umjetnosti i socijalisti"ke Drzave". Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti 29: 307-315.

Kova" Tatjana, Vojnovi% Mijo. 1976. U spomen revoluciji. Split: Institut za historiju radni"kog pokreta Dalmacije - Split; Fond za razvijanje i njegovanje tekovina revolucije i NOR-a op%ine Split.

Krzisnik, Zoran. 1977. "Mojim zemljacima, rudarima iz Trbovlja". U/In Mojim rojakom, trboveljskim rudarjem. Ljubljana: ,ZDO Komunist, 1977.

Leith, James A. 1991. Space and Revolution. Projects for Monuments, Squares, and Public Buildings in France, 1789-1799. Bu) alo: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Madzar, Bozo, ur/ed. 1984. Generalni strajk rudara Bosne i Hercegovine i Husinska buna 1920. Tuzla: IGTRO "Univezal", OOUR izdava"ka djelatnost Tuzla, Regionalni historijski arhiv Tuzla.

Makovic, Zvonko. 2014. "Spomeni"ka plastika Vojina Baki%a". U/In Vojin Baki,. Svjetlonosne forme. Natasa Ivan"evi%, ur/ed. Zagreb: Muzej suvremene umjetnosti.

Maroevi%, Tonko. 1988. "Tri uvodna stavka (za kipara na kvadrat)". U/In Kosta Angeli Radovani. Paule& o Giancarlo, ur/ed. Pordenone: Edizioni Concordia, 59.

Matosevic, Andrea. 2007. "Rasa - grad-spomenik industrijskom elanu". Zarez 9/220-221, 25.

Mazuran-Suboti%, Vesna. 1999. Robert Jean-Ivanovi,. Retrospektivna izlozba. Zagreb: Gliptoteka Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnost.

Mazuran-Suboti%, Vesna. 2005. U/In Hrvatski bibliografski leksikon, mrezno izdanje. Zagreb: Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleza, h& p://hbl.lzmk.hr/clanak.aspx?id=134 (1. 5. 2014.).

Mojim rojakom, trboveljskim rudarjem. 1977. Ljubljana: ,ZP Komunist.

Odbor za spomen-obiljezavanje povijesnih doga$aja i li"nosti Sabora SRH. 1986. Valorizacija i kategorizacija spomenika revolucionarnog radni"kog pokreta, narodnooslobodila"kog rata i socijalisti"ke revolucije. Zagreb: Republi"ki zavod za zastitu spomenika - Zagreb.

Osniva"ki kongres Saveza boraca Narodnooslobodila"kog rata. 1947. Beograd: Glavni odbor Saveza boraca Narodnooslobodila"kog rata.

Sanders, Patricia. 1978. "Rodin's Monument to Labor". ' e Antioch Review 36/4: 476-482. [h& p://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4638119]

Prelog, Petar. 2012. "Problemi samoprikazivanja. Umjetnost i nacionalni identitet u me$uratnom razdoblju". U/In Moderna umjetnost u Hrvatskoj 1898.-1975. Lj. Kolesnik i/and P. Prelog, ur/ed. Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti.

Protic, Miodrag B. 1975. "Jugoslovenska skulptura 1970.-1950.". U/In Jugoslovenska skulptura 1970.-1950. Miodrag B. Proti% ur/ed. Beograd: Muzej savremene umetnosti.

Putovima revolucije. 1979. Zagreb: Turistkomerc.

Ravlic, Slaven, ur/ed. 2013. Hrvatska enciklopedija, mrezno izdanje. Zagreb: Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleza. h& p://www. enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?ID=44663 (27. 4. 2014.).

Ravlic, Slaven, ur/ed. 2013. Hrvatska enciklopedija, mrezno izdanje. Zagreb: Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleza. h& p://www. enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?ID=6734 (15. 4. 2014.).

Unkovski-Korica, Vladimir. 2014. "Jugoslovensko samoupravljanje. Upravljanje radnistva ili upravljanje radnistvom?". U/In Nasle-e jugoslovenskog socijalizma. Promisljanje. Razgovor. Rasprava. Kritika. (E-zbornik). Beograd: Forum za primenjenu istoriju. www. fpi.rs/blog/otvorena-knjiga/.

Van Gelder, Hilde. 2005. "'Social Realism' / en and Now. Constantin Meunier and Allan Sekula". U/In Constantin Meunier. A Dialogue with Allan Sekula. H. Van Gelder, ur/ed. Leuven: Leuven University Press.

Vujicic, Davorin. 2001. "Poslije saltamortale. Ivan Saboli% (1921. - 1986. - 2001.)". Podravski zbornik 26/27.

Novinski !lanci / Newspaper articles

1953. "Spomenik husinskim rudarima. Razgovor s akademskim kiparom Ivanom Saboli%em", Vjesnik, 14. kolovoza.

1954. "Novo delo kipara Koste Angeli-Radovanija", Borba, 22. prosinca.

1959. "Stojan Bati": Ciklus o rudarima". Vjesnik, 22. studeni.

1974. "Sovjetski list o Augustin"i%u". Slobodna Dalmacija, Split, 1. velja"e.

1977. Belis,e - list organizacije udruzenog rada kombinat "Belis,e" 252, 1. studeni. 6-8.

A. H. 1952. "Podize se spomenik husinskim rudarima". Borba, Zagreb, 14. kolovoza, 4.

Z. B. 1976. "Novo spomen-obiljezje". Glas Slavonije, 9. lipnja.

Arhivi / Archives

Arhiv MSUM, Ljubljana. Folder: Bati", Stojan.

Hemeroteka Instituta za povijest umjetnosti, Zagreb. Folder: Angeli Radovani, Kosta.

Visual Archives HAZU. Folders: Saboli%, Ivan; Angeli Radovani, Kosta.

Sanja Horvatincic

Institut za povijest umjetnosti Ulica grada Vukovara 68/III 10000 Zagreb Hrvatska

[email protected]