A Polemics on Plagiarism or the Origins of Postmodernism in Yugoslavia

Abstract

Doubts raised over the publication of Kiš’s A Tomb for Boris Davidovič when it came out in 1976 turned into “one of the biggest literary scandals” in the former Yugoslavia. The allegations that the book was a work of plagiarism caused a polemical war of words in literary and society circles, as well as scientific discussions about one of the key issues of literary ontology, i.e. the relationship between reality and fiction, and also originality and appropriation. The essay looks at this latter aspect of the polemics, not entirely without taking into consideration its socio-political implications. After giving a short outline of plagiarism through time, it determines that the modern view of plagiarism follows Classical definitions, while at the same time relating closely to the advance of individualism at the end of the Middle Ages and particularly in Pre-Romanticism and Romanticism. The advance of individualism influenced changes in the concept of authorship, which during Romanticism turned from the question of what a poet does to the question of what a poet is. It brought about the view of literary work as (intellectual) property, which was followed by its legal protection and the birth of copyright. The roles of the author and authorship have remained relevant with the “dismantling” of the author, which began with modernism and culminated in postmodernism with Barthes’ famous prediction of “the death of the author”. However, the apparent shift away from the author has not weakened his or her position, as one might expect, but rather strengthened it. This has also been reflected in attitudes towards plagiarism: if Romanticism rejected plagiarism for want of originality, which was perceived as a sign of the author’s genius, postmodernism has incorporated it as a legitimate narrative technique by assigning to plagiarism – most often in the form of an unspecified quotation or its adaptation without due citation – and its author an erudite role. According to a selection of scientific literature, a basic definition of plagiarism, its advocates and opponents aside, is widely accepted; nevertheless, it has been the subject of contradictory interpretations, as shown in the case of Danilo Kiš. It is this sharp divide, the clash between the “traditional” and “innovative” interpretations of Kiš’s writing technique, that reflects the seminal period, as well as the important role of his literature, which brought about a new understanding of (literary and social) reality in the former Yugoslavia.