Gendering the Bone: The Politics of Memory in Bosnia and Herzegovina1

Abstract

This article explores and intervenes in the deadlock produced by the identifications of bodily remains resulting from genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Every day, in that country, bodily remains are exhumed, counted, reassociated, managed and consecrated as ethnic remains. This is done through the strategic collaboration of forensic science; multiculturalist post‐conflict management, with its politics of reconciliation; and religious ritual — an uncouth alliance between the scientist, the bureaucrat and the priest. In doing so, the scientist, the bureaucrat and the priest assume the perspective of the perpetrator of the crime. For it is in the fantasy of the perpetrator that the executed person is an ethnic other. The article intervenes by posing the question: what different praxis could deactivate the reification of bones as ethnic victims, would stop the prolongation of the injurious gaze of the perpetrator and would return the bones to common use through which we can contemplate hope after genocide? In other words, what is the politics that will enable us to be hopeful subjects in relation to these bones? Drawing on cultural production in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the article both challenges and goes beyond current mainstream political choices. Thus, it identifies and strengthens hopeful politics in cultural‐as‐political practices that productively bear witness to the precariousness of life. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, it is mainly women artists who harness traumatic events and the loss of the past and present in order to announce a more hopeful politics. What this hopeful politics after genocide is, through what praxis is it enacted, and by which subjects are the main concerns of this article.

1. A version of this article was originally delivered at the London School of Economics Gender Institute Research Seminar, UK, in March 2008. I would like to thank the Special and Extension Programs and the Gender Department staff of the Central European University for their generous support that enabled me to complete this article.

Notes

1. A version of this article was originally delivered at the London School of Economics Gender Institute Research Seminar, UK, in March 2008. I would like to thank the Special and Extension Programs and the Gender Department staff of the Central European University for their generous support that enabled me to complete this article.

2. I am relying here on the indispensible critical and theoretical breakthroughs by Branimir Stojanović and Nebojša Jovanović.

3. All translations are mine.