anthrop o l i s 3.2
cultural anthropological journal
3.2 / 2006 – Volume 3 / Number
This paper gives insight into the mobilisation of national myths in Hungarian political and public discourses, between the period of the Millennium (2000) and EU integration (2004).1 The author is a social anthropologist, expert in international development policies. Graduated from the University of Pécs (Hungary) in 2002, she pursued post-gradual research in politics and anthropology at the University in Aalborg (Denmark), University of Cergy-Pontoise (France) and the University of Kent (UK), and worked with the International Organisation of Migration, and with Transparency International. She has been awarded several times the Marie-Curie research grant of the European Commission. She specialized to the development- and foreign policy of the European Union and studied the effects these policies exercise on the new national identity formations within the Union, namely in Central Eastern Europe and the Western Balkans. The present study was prepared in Canterbury with the valuable contribution of Mr Glenn Bowman.
“Legend is like faith, it strengthens us.”
A new symbolism and the recycling of the past have simultaneously become very popular political activities in the post-socialist countries in Central and Eastern Europe.3 Eighteen years after socialism and three years in the European Union, the symbolism is still kept alive. It seems that the political rhetoric has a never ending military arsenal. This rhetoric is fed by the populist agenda that stems either from patriotic or civic morality, either from pragmatism, or from other, not yet known political discursive constellations. Anxious by this all encompassing, everywhere infiltrating ritual, I ask the following question: how far can populism go in mobilising political subjects?
Focusing on Hungary, the years of change from socialism to liberal capitalism brought about some general patterns of political expression, as the reinitiation of celebrations, political manifestations, the replacement of the socialist symbols, street names, sculptures, reburials of political bodies etc.4 At the same time, the sunset of the ideological state discourse promoted an especially visible process that of the creation of a new political language in the opening public space Certainly, the negotiation among the newly born political actors had happened in great measure in this kind of symbolical linguistic space. How can we reinterpret the past, in order to make a legitimate narrative of it? – this had been the critical question for different political parties. For the most part, the creation of a postsocialist „cultural“ order, the actors use cultural categories for the „correction“, „reconstruction“ and „nationalisation“ of the past.5 According to Péter Niedermüller, on the one side, skirmishing tended to reevaluate concrete historical events, on the other, it dealt with abstract social categories such as democracy, nation, and identity. I think these two are independent from each other, that means, actually the reinterpretation, and the revaluation of historical events are highly exploited by actual political purposes.
Within this framework I will consider the return of national myths in the political scene between the years of 2000 and 2004 as an answer to the „European identity challenge”. I suggest that a specific symbolical structure was developed in Hungary that informed the right wing political discourse. From an anthropological point of view, this symbolical space is able to polarize the public and private life spheres; it is not alien to populist discourse in general, and affects the politics of today’s Hungary as well. I will analyze the mechanisms of the created rhetoric of the past political period with the help of historical films that were produced in this, before mentioned, period. According to my hypothesis, there is a correlation between the arguments of nationalist political rhetoric and these historical films, which can be easily detected by looking at the place they offer to the political subjects, the citizens.
The following issues will be analysed in the context of the Millennium celebrations and the released films: (1) the importance of the “dream” as a device in the national imaginary (millennium discourse of Viktor Orbán on the 20th August 2000 before the Parliament) the narratives on legends around the figure of Saint Laszló in Sacra Corona; and the destroying dream as state of the nation in the film Hídember (Bridgeman). (2) sacralisation of the religious relics: the Millennium procession of the Saint Right Hand of King Stephan and his representation in Sacra Corona.
(3) political leadership and the myth of the national unity represented in the mystification of the Crown and the figure of Saint László. (4) moral superiority in contrast with the oppressors. The myth of the rebel in Bánk Bán. A new relevance of the figure of Széchenyi as the national behavioural model in Hídember.
The study will look for such rhetorical structures – mainly symbols – in the film narrative, which invite the spectator to identify a specific content, and it will try to describe how these structures work. Myths operate as the unquestionable bases for an identity, and are mostly embedded in a moral discourse. Film narration therefore becomes a political instrument, not only in influencing the collective perception of the history, but also in converting the moral of the story into behavioural instructions. In order to give a larger perspective to the phenomena, the connection of actual politics and historical narratives, and the relevance of historical meta-theories to the explanation of our issue will be discussed at the end of the paper.
Millennium on screen
A particularly interesting period of the national discourse as a self-legitimizing act of the political power was the one of 1998-2002 with the moderate right wing FIDESZ (Party of Young Democrats) government, an actor in the opposition since 2002.6
FIDESZ was the first party to attribute a strategic importance to the symbolic territory, and took possession of the symbolic political space in 1998, establishing the government in coalition with the Christian Democrats (KDNP). They reacted very quickly to the lack of a rhetoric that is able to fulfill the task of identity formation, at the time when the rival socialists pursued a pragmatic argumentation. The myth-making activity clearly dominated the nationalist arguments and the rhetorical arsenal of the reorganised party, which, after loosing the 2002 elections, formed the “Movement of Citizens” (Polgári Körök). The expropria
anthropolis 3.2 |74 position
tion of nationalist symbols and myths went along with a clear message directed to present-day politics, and to the EU integration.
The strategy concentrated around the turning date of 2000, millennium year of the foundation of the Hungarian state. The main pillars of this symbolism were the following events: the Millennium celebration initiated by a government order; a law on the transfer of the Crown in the Parliament; the initiation of the exhibition „Dreamer of dreams” (Álmok álmodója) on famous Hungarian scientists; the creation of the „House of Terror” (Terror Háza), a museum in the former house of the secret communist police (AVO) for the commemoration of the Nazi and Communist victims. Likewise, a “Millennium budget” had been created, out of which the Ministry of Cultural Heritage sponsored some historical films. That is how Sacra Corona (Gábor Koltay, 2001), a film reanimating Saint László and his time; the filmed opera Bánk Bán (Csaba Káel, 2002) about the honourable opposition of Hungarians to the Habsburg oppressors; and the film Bridgeman (Hídember, Géza Bereményi 2002), a narration on István Széchenyi, a great political figure of the 19 century’s developing Hungary, called “the greatest Hungarian” came to be.
As András Gerô points out, the Millennium was processed first of all as a cultural and identity forming event, in which, contrary to the one in 1896 (Millennium of the occupation of the motherland), civilisation and infrastructural activities were neglected. As the political stake was high, organizers deliberately exploited the relative permeability of culture and propaganda.7 The making of these films itself points out that they go beyond the question of artistic quality. Political importance of the creations is shown by the fact that only the Sacra Corona film received 200 million HUF (800 thousand EUR) of support; that István Nemeskürty, a right positioned historian was present in the writing of the script as government representative, and high status officials assisted the Premier. Therefore, we cannot judge these films as independent artistic productions, but rather a part of governmental interests. There was much debate around the legitimacy of the sponsoring and the final quality of the films as well.