The Bridge on the Drina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the World Heritage Site, see Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge.
The Bridge on the Drina
The Bridge on the Drina.jpg
First edition cover
Author Ivo Andrić
Original title Na Drini ćuprija
Country Yugoslavia
Language Serbo-Croatian
Genre Historical fiction
Publisher Prosveta
Publication date
March 1945
Pages 318

The Bridge on the Drina (Serbo-Croatian: Na Drini ćuprija, Serbian Cyrillic: На Дрини ћуприја) is a historical novel by the Yugoslav writer Ivo Andrić. It revolves around the Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge in Višegrad, which spans the Drina River and stands as a silent witness to history from its construction by the Ottomans in the mid-16th century until its partial destruction during World War I. The story spans about four centuries and covers the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian occupations of the region, with a particular emphasis on the lives, destinies and relations of the local inhabitants, especially Serbs and Bosnian Muslims.

Andrić had been Yugoslavia's ambassador to Germany from 1939 to 1941, during the early years of World War II, and was arrested by the Germans in April 1941, following the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia. In June 1941, he was allowed to return to German-occupied Belgrade but was confined to a friend's apartment in conditions that some biographers liken to house arrest. The novel was one of three that Andrić wrote over the next several years. All three were published in short succession in 1945, following Belgrade's liberation from the Nazis. The Bridge on the Drina was published in March of that year to widespread acclaim.

In 1961, Andrić was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature and his works became subject to international recognition. The Bridge on the Drina remains Andrić's best known work. Serbian filmmaker Emir Kusturica is planning a cinematic adaption of the novel, for which he has constructed a mock-town named after Andrić not far from the bridge, which was reconstructed after World War I and has been declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO.

Summary[edit]

A young Serb boy from the vicinity of Višegrad is taken from his mother by the Ottomans as part of the devşirme levy, one of many Christian boys to experience this fate during the Ottoman Empire's 500-year-long occupation of the Balkans. The boy's mother follows her son wailing until she reaches the Drina River, where he is taken across by ferry and she can no longer follow. The young boy is converted to Islam and assigned the Turkish name of Mehmed, becoming known as Mehmed-paša Sokolović. He rises through the Ottoman military ranks and around the age of 60 becomes the Grand Vizier, a position he holds for the next fifteen years. During his time as Grand Vizier, he serves under three sultans and oversees the Ottoman Empire's expansion into Central Europe. He remains haunted by the memory of being forcibly taken from his mother and orders the construction of a bridge at the part of the river where the two became separated.

Construction begins in 1566, and five years later the bridge is completed, together with a caravanserai (or han). The bridge replaces the unreliable ferry transport that was once the only means of traversing the river and comes to represent an important link between the Bosnia Eyalet and the rest of the Ottoman Empire. The bridge is built by serfs, who intermittently stage strikes and sabotage the construction site in protest against the poor working conditions. The Ottomans respond harshly, impaling the saboteurs. The bridge is wider across the middle portion, known as the gate (or kapija), and this section becomes a popular meeting place. Every important moment in the lives of the local residents comes to revolve around the bridge, with Christian children crossing it to be baptized on the opposite bank, and children of all religions playing around it. As time progresses, legends develop around the history of the bridge. The locals tell of two Christian infants who were buried alive inside it to placate the fairies (vile) that thwarted the bridge's construction. They come to regard two holes on the side of the bridge as places where the infants' mothers would come to suckle them as they were entombed inside. About a century later, the Habsburg Monarchy reclaims much of Central Europe and the northern Balkans from the Ottomans, triggering a crisis within the empire. Due to lack of state funds, the caravanserai is abandoned and falls into disuse. The bridge, on the other hand, stands for centuries without maintenance because of how well it was constructed. The residents of Višegrad—Turks, Serbs, Sephardic Jews, and Roma—stand in solidarity with one another during the Drina's regular floods.

The partially destroyed bridge, 1915

The first nationalist tensions arise in the 19th century, with the outbreak of the First Serbian Uprising in present-day central Serbia. The Turks construct a blockhouse on the bridge, decorating it with stakes on which they pin the heads of suspected rebels. One evening, the blockhouse burns down. In the ensuing decades, as the Ottoman Empire continues to decline, Bosnia is ravaged by plague. After the Congress of Berlin in 1878, Serbia and Montenegro become fully independent countries. Austria-Hungary receives a right to occupy Bosnia-Herzegovina and turns it into a protectorate. The occupation comes as a shock to the residents of the town, which has remained largely unchanged since the time of the bridge's completion, and the local people experience difficulties accepting the numerous changes and reforms that accompany Austro-Hungarian rule. A barrack is built at the site of the caravanserai and the town experiences a substantial influx of foreigners. People from all parts of Austria-Hungary arrive, opening new businesses and bringing the customs of their native regions with them. A narrow gauge railway line is built to Sarajevo and the bridge loses much of its strategic importance. Local children begin to be educated in Sarajevo, and some go on to continue their studies in Vienna. They bring home new social and cultural ideas from abroad, among them the concepts of trade unions and socialism, while newly established newspapers acquaint the town's inhabitants with nationalism. Tensions flare following the assassination of Empress Elisabeth of Austria in 1898. In 1908, Austria-Hungary formally annexes Bosnia-Herzegovina, sparking tensions with Serbia, which the Austro-Hungarians come to regard as a serious obstacle to their further conquest of the eastern Balkans. The Balkan Wars of 1912–13 see the Ottomans almost completely forced from the region, and relations between Austria-Hungary and Serbia deteriorate further. The significance of the middle portion of the bridge also becomes undermined, as residents of different ethnicities become suspicious and wary of one another.

In June 1914, Bosnian Serb student Gavrilo Princip assassinates Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, setting of a chain of events that lead to the outbreak of World War I. Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia, and the local authorities begin to incite Višegrad's non-Serb population against the town's Serb residents. The bridge with the old road to Sarajevo suddenly regains its importance, as the railway line is not adequate to transport all the materiel and soldiers who are preparing to attack Serbia in the autumn of 1914. Austria-Hungary's invasion is swiftly repulsed and the Serbians advance across the Drina, prompting the Austro-Hungarians to evacuate Višegrad and destroy portions of the bridge.

Writing and publication[edit]

Man sitting at his desk
Andrić in his private study

Ivo Andrić was Yugoslavia's best known and most successful literary figure, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1961.[1] He was born to Bosnian Croat parents near Travnik on 9 October 1892, but spent most of his childhood in the town of Višegrad.[2][3] His formative years were spent in the shadow of the town's most distinctive landmark, the Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge. As a child, Andrić played in its vicinity and was exposed to the legends surrounding it and its constructor, Mehmed-paša Sokolović.[4] Born into a Serb family on the outskirts of the town, Sokolović had been abducted by the Ottomans as a child as part of the devşirme tax imposed on Christian subjects, taken to Istanbul and inducted into the janissary corps. Despite this, he remained in contact with his Christian family, and in 1557, convinced the Porte to grant the Serbian Orthodox Church autonomy.[5][a]

Andrić's literary career began in 1911, and prior to the outbreak of World War I, he published a number of poems, essays and reviews, and also translated the works of foreign writers.[6] In the years leading up to the war, Andrić joined a number of South Slav student movements calling for an end to the Austro-Hungarian occupation.[7] He was also a close friend of Princip.[8] In late July or early August 1914, Andrić was arrested by the Austro-Hungarians for his connections to Franz Ferdinand's assassins. He spent much of World War I in captivity, and was only freed in July 1917, after Emperor Charles declared a general amnesty for all Austro-Hungarian political prisoners.[9][10] In 1920, Andrić entered the diplomatic service, and served as an ambassador to the newly created Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later the Kingdom of Yugoslavia) throughout the interwar period.[11] In 1939, he was appointed Yugoslavia's ambassador to Germany, which went on to spearhead an invasion of his country in April 1941, within the wider context of World War II.[12][13] During and immediately after the invasion, Andrić and his staff remained in German custody. In June 1941, Andrić was permitted to return to Belgrade.[14] Now officially retired from the diplomatic service, he was confined to a friend's apartment and lived in conditions that some biographers liken to house arrest.[15] Over the next three years, he focused on his writing and pondered over the disintegration of Yugoslavia, which had become the scene of a brutal inter-ethnic civil war following the German-led invasion.[16]

The Bridge on the Drina was written between July 1942 and December 1943.[17][b] A fifty-page outline of the novel has been preserved, as have Andrić's research notes.[17] In March 1945, it became the first title released by the newly founded state-owned publishing house Prosveta, as part of a series entitled Južnoslovenski pisci (South Slav Writers).[18] The first edition, numbering some 5,000 copies, was sold out by the end of that year.[19] It was one of three novels that Andrić published in 1945, the others being Travnik Chronicle (Serbo-Croatian: Travnička hronika) and The Lady from Sarajevo (Serbo-Croatian: Gospođica), in September and November 1945, respectively.[13] A total of five editions of The Bridge on the Drina were published over the next four years.[19] Andrić's works attained international recognition after he was awarded the Nobel Prize, and were translated into dozens of languages hence.[20] The novel had been translated into English several years earlier by Lovett F. Edwards, in 1959.[21]

Style[edit]

The novel's release coincided with the end of World War II and communist efforts to promote the style of socialist realism, which was typically characterized by depictions of "superficial happiness" glorifying the values of communism.[22] In contrast, Slavonic studies professor David A. Norris writes, "Andrić's Bosnia is often a dark world expressed through deep and complex narrative structures".[1] Andrić never publicly expressed sympathy for communism and his works openly dealt with controversial questions of national identity at a time when the communists were propagating the idea of Brotherhood and Unity among the various Yugoslav peoples. Literary historian Andrew B. Wachtel believes that The Bridge on the Drina's focus on the distant past allowed Andrić to address contemporary social, political and religious issues without overtly abrading the delicate system of inter-ethnic tolerance the communists had established in the post-war period.[23]

Like almost all of Andrić's works, the book was originally written in Serbian Cyrillic.[24][c] The characters use the Ijekavian dialect of Serbo-Croatian primarily spoken west of the Drina, while the narrator uses the Ekavian dialect spoken primarily in Serbia.[26] This is a reflection of Andrić's own linguistic proclivities, as he had abandoned both written and spoken Ijekavian and reverted to Ekavian upon moving to Belgrade in the early 1920s.[11] Both dialogue and narration passages are perfused with Turkisms (Serbo-Croatian: Turcizmi), words of Turkish, Arabic or Persian origin that had found their way into the South Slav languages during Ottoman rule.[26] Turkisms are so prevalent that even the novel's title contains one: the word ćuprija, derived from the Turkish word köprü, which means bridge.[27] Also present are many words of German and Ladino origin, reflecting the historical and political circumstances of the time period described in the novel.[26]

Andrić himself characterized The Bridge on the Drina as a chronicle rather than a novel. Edwards also declined to classify it as a novel, for "its scope is too vast, its characters too numerous, its period of action too long." Literary scholar Annabel Patterson writes "There is no hero or heroine to hold it together, nor even a family or dynasty. In place of these there is the bridge, whose birth we attend, whose stability we come to count on."[28] She also hesitates to characterize it as a historical novel because most of the events described in it actually occurred as opposed to having been fictionalized. Patterson notes that other scholars have classified it as a "non-fiction novel", a term she considers superfluous. "If we wish for simplicity," she writes, "we can call the The Bridge on the Drina a novel to distinguish it from Andrić's collections of short stories. But if we wish for precision, The Bridge on the Drina can best be classified as a collection of short stories of peasant life held together by a bridge."[29] The book deviates from other texts that have been described as chronicles in that the narrator observes events itinerantly and retrospectively. The style of storytelling Andrić employs is often likened to a transcendent historical monologue. Literary scholar Guido Snel believes such a stylistic interpretation neglects the novel's dialogic properties and its ability to act as a back-and-forth between the narrator and reader, drawing a connection between the past described in the novel and the reader's present. Snel asserts that this has led Serb scholars to uphold Andrić's narrative authority and Muslim scholars to challenge and reject it.[26]

Themes and motifs[edit]

The Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge over the Drina River, ca. 1900

The Bridge on the Drina remains Andrić's most famous novel and has received the most scholarly analysis of all his works. Most scholars interpret the eponymous bridge as a metonym for Yugoslavia, which was itself a bridge between East and West during the Cold War, "partaking of both but being neither". However, at the time of writing, the country did not enjoy the reputation of an inter-civilizational mediator, which was fostered by Tito only after his split with Stalin in 1948. Thus, the novel can be seen as having contributed to the formation of this national self-image.[30] Andrić suggests that the building of roads and bridges by Great Powers is rarely done as a gesture of friendship towards local populations, but rather as a means of facilitating imperialist conquest. Thus, the bridge is both a symbol of unification and division. It is a symbol of unification in that it allows the inhabitants of Višegrad to cross from one bank to another, and in that the kapija serves as a popular meeting place. On the other hand, it divides the town's inhabitants by acting as a constant reminder of the Ottoman conquest.[31]

Michael Sells, a professor of Islamic history and literature, posits that one of the novel's main themes is race betrayal. In Andrić's view, Sells asserts, Slavs are "racially Christian", and the conversion of some to Islam is perceived as a great evil epitomized by the practice of devşirme.[32] The legend of Christian infants being buried alive within the bridge stems from The Building of Skadar, a Serbian epic poem dating back to the Middle Ages.[33] Sells interprets the legend as an allegory for the entrapment of Slav converts to Islam within the structures of an alien religion.[32] He describes Andrić's depiction of Muslim characters as mono-dimensional. Muslim Slavs depicted in the novel, he asserts, fall under three types: "the evil Turk", "the good Turk" and the janissary, who secretly mourns being severed from his Christian brethren. These character depictions, Sells argues, betray Andrić's stereotypical notions of Islam.[34] Ani Kokobobo, a professor of Slavic studies, believes violence is a theme that offers conceptual cohesion to an otherwise seemingly fragmented narrative.[35] The most notable depiction of it in the novel is the impalement of Radisav of Unište, who attempts to sabotage the construction of the bridge. Several scholars interpret Radisav's impalement as an allegory for the state of Bosnia itself—subjected, vulnerable and fragmented between Christianity and Islam.[36]

Historian Tomislav Dulić interprets the destruction of the bridge at the novel's conclusion as having several symbolic meanings. On the one hand, it marks the end of traditional Ottoman life in the town and signals the unstoppable oncome of modernity, while on the other, it foreshadows the death and destruction that await Bosnia and Herzegovina in the future. Dulić describes the ending as "deeply pessimistic", and attributes Andrić's pessimism to the events of World War II.[37]

Reception and legacy[edit]

Statue of Andrić in Višegrad

The three novels Andrić published in 1945 were an immediate success.[22] The Bridge on the Drina was instantly recognized as a classic by the Yugoslav literary establishment.[16] The novel played an important role in shaping Andrić's Tito-era reputation as the very embodiment of Yugoslav literature, a "living equivalent to Njegoš".[38] From its publication in 1945 until the dissolution of Yugoslavia in 1991–92, the novel was required reading in Yugoslav secondary schools.[39]

The novel's literary and historical significance was instrumental in persuading the Swedish Academy to award Andrić the Nobel Prize.[40] In his introduction to Andrić's Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences member Göran Liljestrand took note of the symbolic significance of the bridge and described Andrić as a unifying force. "Just as the bridge on the Drina brought East and West together," Liljestrand said, "so your work has acted as a link, combining the culture of your country with other parts of the planet."[41] Following Andrić's death in 1975, Slovene novelist Ivan Potrč wrote an obituary praising the Nobel Laureate. "Andrić did not merely write The Bridge on the Drina," Potrč remarked. "He built, is building and will continue to build bridges between our peoples and nationalities."[42] In subsequent decades, large sections of the Croatian and Bosnian Muslim (Bosniak)[d] literary establishments distanced themselves from Andrić's body of work due to his strong ties with Serbian culture.[22] In 1992, at the outset of the Bosnian War, a Bosniak nationalist destroyed a bust of Andrić in Višegrad using a sledgehammer.[44] Later that year, more than 200 Bosniak civilians were killed on the bridge by Bosnian Serb militias and their bodies tossed into the Drina.[45] By 1993, owing to the war and consequent ethnic cleansing, the multi-ethnic Bosnia described in the novel had largely been consigned to history.[46] Andrić and his works, particularly The Bridge on the Drina, remain a source of controversy among Bosniaks due to their alleged anti-Muslim undertones.[47]

Patterson describes the The Bridge on the Drina as a seminal work whose themes and motifs—forced labour, invasion, annexation and displacement—would appear frequently in subsequent 20th-century fiction.[48] The town of Višegrad and its historic sites were popularized throughout Yugoslavia as a result of the novel, to which the Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge owes its renown.[49] The Bridge on the Drina was widely read by Western scholars, reporters and policy makers amidst the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s, and often cited as one of the two most important texts ever written about the Balkans, the other being Rebecca West's 1941 travel book Black Lamb and Grey Falcon.[50] The bridge was recognized as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 2007.[51] In 2011, Serbian filmmaker Emir Kusturica began construction of a mock-town called Andrićgrad in the vicinity of the bridge.[52] Andrićgrad was officially opened on 28 June 2014, the 100th anniversary of Franz Ferdinand's assassination.[53] Kusturica intends to use it as a set for a future cinematic adaption of the novel.[52]

References[edit]

Endnotes[edit]

  1. ^ The Church's leader, Patriarch Makarije, is believed to have either been Sokolović's brother or nephew. The following three Patriarchs were also relatives of Sokolović.[5]
  2. ^ Biographer Radovan Popović writes that the novel was finished in late 1944.[18]
  3. ^ Serbo-Croatian can be written in either the Latin or Cyrillic script.[25]
  4. ^ The name Bosniak was adopted by a congress of leading Bosnian Muslim intellectuals in September 1993. Prior to this, Bosniaks were referred to as Bosnian Muslims.[43]

Citations[edit]

  1. ^ a b Norris 1999, p. 62.
  2. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, p. 11.
  3. ^ Vucinich 1995, p. 1.
  4. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, p. 13.
  5. ^ a b Banac 1984, p. 64.
  6. ^ Vucinich 1995, p. 28.
  7. ^ Norris 1999, p. 59.
  8. ^ Dedijer 1966, p. 194.
  9. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, pp. 15–17.
  10. ^ Vucinich 1995, pp. 29–30.
  11. ^ a b Norris 1999, p. 60.
  12. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, pp. 25–26.
  13. ^ a b Vucinich 1995, p. 34.
  14. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, p. 27.
  15. ^ Juričić 1986, p. 55.
  16. ^ a b Wachtel 1998, p. 156.
  17. ^ a b Hawkesworth 1984, p. 124.
  18. ^ a b Popović 1989, p. 54.
  19. ^ a b Hawkesworth 1984, p. 28.
  20. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, pp. 29–30.
  21. ^ Ramadanović 2000, p. 55.
  22. ^ a b c Norris 1999, p. 61.
  23. ^ Wachtel 1998, pp. 156–157.
  24. ^ Wachtel 1998, p. 180.
  25. ^ Hawkesworth 1984, Note on the Pronunciation of Serbo-Croatian names.
  26. ^ a b c d Snel 2004, p. 211.
  27. ^ Alexander 2006, p. 407.
  28. ^ Patterson 2014, p. 45.
  29. ^ Patterson 2014, p. 46.
  30. ^ Wachtel 1998, p. 161.
  31. ^ Aleksić 2013, p. 57.
  32. ^ a b Sells 1998, pp. 45–50.
  33. ^ Aleksić 2013, pp. 55–60.
  34. ^ Sells 1998, p. 179, note 30.
  35. ^ Kokobobo 2007, p. 69.
  36. ^ Kokobobo 2007, pp. 71–73.
  37. ^ Dulić 2005, p. 176.
  38. ^ Wachtel 1998, p. 157.
  39. ^ Nikolić 2016, p. 177.
  40. ^ Patterson 2014, p. 44.
  41. ^ Wachtel 2008, p. 119.
  42. ^ Wachtel 1998, p. 275, note 36.
  43. ^ Velikonja 2003, p. 254.
  44. ^ Silber 20 September 1994.
  45. ^ Nikolić 2016, p. 171.
  46. ^ Stokes 1993, p. 251.
  47. ^ Hayden 2012, p. 353.
  48. ^ Patterson 2014, p. 52.
  49. ^ Binder 2013, p. 34.
  50. ^ Walasek 2013, p. 9.
  51. ^ UNESCO 28 June 2007.
  52. ^ a b Binder 2013, p. 44.
  53. ^ Aspden 27 June 2014.

Sources[edit]

External links[edit]