What do you think?
Rate this book
Bałkany wyobrażone
"Gdyby Bałkany nie istniały, należałoby je wymyślić" napisał Hermann Keyserling w swoim słynnym tekście z 1928 roku. Książka Marii Todorovej Bałkany wyobrażone śledzi relacje pomiędzy tym co realne i tym, co imaginacyjne. Opierając się na licznych dziełach literatury podróżniczej, relacjach dyplomatów, doniesieniach naukowców dziennikarzy, książka Todorovej eksploruje ontologię Bałkanów od osiemnastego wieku do dnia dzisiejszego, odkrywając drogę rodzenia się zmitologizowanego wizerunku tej części Europy. Autorce, urodzonej i wykształconej na Bałkanach, udało się połączyć w swoim klasycznym już dzisiaj dziele podejście naukowe z głębokim, prawdziwym zrozumieniem.
552 pages, Paperback
First published May 22, 1997
96 people are currently reading
2025 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
Read
April 24, 2014Back when I was a kid, there was a Serbian guy in my hometown who ran a good little bakery that I used to go to with my old man. Unfortunately, somewhere around the Kosovo War, he started blaming all the shit going down in the Balkans on the "Jewish New York Times." This colored my view of the Balkan perspective for years to come.
Of course, as I matured, my view became less black and white, but a book like Todorova's helps the reader articulate why the Balkans are perceived the way they are in the West. The Edward Said comparisons are inevitable, but if I had to compare it to anything, it would be Syed Alatas' The Myth of the Lazy Native, in which he attacks the colonial perception of the peoples of the Malay Archipelago. Both are elegant, forceful, well-evidenced salvos.
Of course, as I matured, my view became less black and white, but a book like Todorova's helps the reader articulate why the Balkans are perceived the way they are in the West. The Edward Said comparisons are inevitable, but if I had to compare it to anything, it would be Syed Alatas' The Myth of the Lazy Native, in which he attacks the colonial perception of the peoples of the Malay Archipelago. Both are elegant, forceful, well-evidenced salvos.
January 25, 2015
Impecabilă în definirea a ce nu sunt Balcanii (nu sunt identici cu imaginarul colectiv occidental format după o serie de prejudecăți și conjunctură politică) dar ceva mai puțin convingătoare în descrierea a ce sunt Balcanii, monografia lui Todorova e totuși o sursă enciclopedică rară privind ethosul albanezilor, bulgarilor, sărbilor, grecilor, românilor și a turcilor adunate sub aceiași copertă.
February 14, 2019
Ne mogu da se otmem utisku da sam i ja, kao osoba koja živi na ovim prostorima, prihvatila čitav korpus ideja o Balkanu kao anomalnom i nedovoljno razvijenom poluostrvu čije se zemlje, na putu ka EU utrkuju ko će pre dostići stepen evropske "civilizacije". Ne postoji balkanski mentalitet, postoje samo kulturne varijacije u okviru identiteta koje male balkanske nacionalne države nastoje da izgrade.
March 8, 2010
Essential reading for anyone interested in challenging the commonly held assumption that "the Balkans" exist as a separate entity from that of continental Europe. While Todorova's style is dense and pedantic, her research is impeccable and her arguments convincing. I recommend this to anyone interested in reading a work of serious scholarship regarding the Balkans.
February 25, 2023
"Bałkanizm stał się z czasem wygodnym substytutem emocjonalnego wyładowania, którego dostarczał przedtem orientalizm, zwalniając Zachód z oskarżeń o rasizm, kolonializm, europocentryzm i nietolerancję wobec islamu. Przecież Bałkany leżą w Europie, zamieszkuje je biała ludność, przeważnie chrześcijanie (...). Podobnie jak w przypadku Orientu Bałkany posłużyły za magazyn cech negatywnych, w opozycji do których zbudowano pozytywny i pochlebny wizerunek "Europejczyka" i "Zachodu". Ponowne zaistnienie Wschodu i orientalizmu jako niezależnych wartości semantycznych sprawiło, że Bałkany stały się poddanym Europy, jej antycywilizacją, jej alter ego, jej ciemną stroną."
July 26, 2021
На одмор по Грчкој и Северној Македонији понео сам овај класик балканолошких студија. Чини ми се да сам већ једном читао/прелиставао ово дело али мислим да је добро да сам га сада обновио.
Имагинарни Балкан је култна књига из које је велики број западњака научио своје основе познавања прилика у региону. Ауторка је Бугарка Марија Тодорова, амерички ђак, професорка на америчком колеџу и ћерка Бугарског председника.
Чини ми се да одатле потиче већина недостатака ове књиге а то је академска импотенција и поприлично безмуђе у квалификовњу обимне историографске грађе. Такође књига је поприлично бугаро-центрична (а након тога румуно и грчко-центрична), што је разумљиво. Обзиром на датум објављивања, књига такође очекивано нема одговарајући третман (кључних?) догађаја с краја ХХ века и почетка ХХI века.
Без обзира на то што Тодорова пропушта ложење или нема никакаву визију и емоцију (или не сме јавно да је саопшти) књига јесте занимљива јер садржи доста обимна историографска документа која знаковито ”објашњавају” шта су нам све радили.
За сваког иоле обавештеног сељака, надничара и поштеног интелектуалца, након читања ове књиге јасно је колико смо ми најјаче главе Балкана и колико ми морамо да радимо на развоју идеје да је Балкан део блиског истока јер нико од ових осталих млитавих Балканаца то неће урадити.
Имагинарни Балкан је култна књига из које је велики број западњака научио своје основе познавања прилика у региону. Ауторка је Бугарка Марија Тодорова, амерички ђак, професорка на америчком колеџу и ћерка Бугарског председника.
Чини ми се да одатле потиче већина недостатака ове књиге а то је академска импотенција и поприлично безмуђе у квалификовњу обимне историографске грађе. Такође књига је поприлично бугаро-центрична (а након тога румуно и грчко-центрична), што је разумљиво. Обзиром на датум објављивања, књига такође очекивано нема одговарајући третман (кључних?) догађаја с краја ХХ века и почетка ХХI века.
Без обзира на то што Тодорова пропушта ложење или нема никакаву визију и емоцију (или не сме јавно да је саопшти) књига јесте занимљива јер садржи доста обимна историографска документа која знаковито ”објашњавају” шта су нам све радили.
За сваког иоле обавештеног сељака, надничара и поштеног интелектуалца, након читања ове књиге јасно је колико смо ми најјаче главе Балкана и колико ми морамо да радимо на развоју идеје да је Балкан део блиског истока јер нико од ових осталих млитавих Балканаца то неће урадити.
June 18, 2021
Inspired by Orientalism by Edward Said (even it tries not to be) it might be more interesting to the audience that isn't from the region it covers, Balkan.
For me, the book was kinda all over the place and didn't really like emphasize on the Bulgaria (author is of Bulgarian origin).
Many parts didn't really have anything to do with Balkan so that was minus as well.
If you are interested in Balkan you will find this educational, if not, limited use, IMHO.
For me, the book was kinda all over the place and didn't really like emphasize on the Bulgaria (author is of Bulgarian origin).
Many parts didn't really have anything to do with Balkan so that was minus as well.
If you are interested in Balkan you will find this educational, if not, limited use, IMHO.
January 16, 2021
O carte de referință foarte bună pentru tema balcanismului, în special din prisma literaturii de călătorie pe care o abordează. Todorova oferă surse concrete pentru tot ceea ce atestă și se bazează pe argumente solide. Merită 5/5 stele, fiind una dintre cele mai bune cărți despre balcanism pe care le-am citit până acum.
October 5, 2021
Na tragu djela "Orijentalizam", Edwarda Saida.
February 10, 2018
The Balkans - an area considered relatively 'inconsequential' by larger (or more important nations). However, the Balkan states have been through a lot of turmoil and change. The author tries to make us aware of some of the interesting history of this region, albeit in an overly pedantic and roundabout way.
Colonial powers would always maintain that they did folks a favour by 'civilizing' them, and my view of the Balkans prior to reading this book was from a Western standpoint as well. However, in that sense, this book was an eye-opener. I didn't really enjoy the writing style a lot, and it was tedious in parts, nevertheless, a good insight into the history of the region.
Colonial powers would always maintain that they did folks a favour by 'civilizing' them, and my view of the Balkans prior to reading this book was from a Western standpoint as well. However, in that sense, this book was an eye-opener. I didn't really enjoy the writing style a lot, and it was tedious in parts, nevertheless, a good insight into the history of the region.
February 20, 2013
Excruciating blather. Always be wary of a book which admits, in 4-5 pages, its deficiencies and faults. Why not take the time to write that and edit the thing? Anyway, this book is about how people talk about the Balkans, or, how the word "Balkans" is used pejoratively. Whatever. Every ethnicity known to man and humanity has disparaging things to say about everyone else. Take your Derrida, Foucault, and unprintable other-French-guy and toss 'em in the balkans.
November 10, 2023
(this will be a long one, you've been warned)
First off, I want to say how much I appreciate when an author has their own voice and infuses the text they are writing with their personality. I went into this expecting a dense, mentally challenging read, which it did end up being and it was very rewarding. However, it was Todorova's witty and at times sarcastic criticisms of the West's hypocrisies that made it an entertaining read which I did not expect from a political and historiographical book.
That being said, this book is clearly aimed at a Western audience as it deconstructs and contextualizes the historical, cultural, and political background of the term Balkan(s) which much of the West had a hand in shaping and then shaming. Todorova sets out to define the particular ostracization of Balkan people and countries by the West, inspired by Edward Said's Orientalism, and as a result coins the term "balkanism". As a Balkan person who has resided in a Western country for nearly a decade (and frankly, even before that), a lot of the arguments presented supporting Balkanism as a specific form of prejudice felt obvious to me from personal experience, as I imagine they would be for other Balkan people.
That's not to imply that there's no educational value in this book for Balkan people! If anything, I found the chronological historical analysis of the term and the insight into the religious and geopolitical realities of empires during Ottoman rule an extremely valuable contextualization to the (likely flawed and biased) history knowledge I gained in school. Likewise, it was interesting to learn more about the individual histories of Balkan countries and how that shaped their adoption of the term Balkan and what it means to them. It also gave those arguments I "intrinsically knew", concrete political terms which will certainly help me with political analysis in the future. I think every Balkan person would benefit from delving deeper into their neighbors' histories and examining their place in the European tapestry.
Despite her sober and clear-cut teardown of Western prejudices, Todorova is not without her biases either. She rightfully criticizes Romania's interwar intellectuals for their ties to, and in some cases, outright support for Nazism and the Iron Guard, responsible for some of the most gruesome extermination campaigns of Jewish people in WW2, as a way to distance themselves from the Balkans. Yet, she conveniently sidesteps her own country's membership in the Axis powers and complicity in the Holocaust which in times of such widespread historical revisionism is extremely concerning. Moreover, she tends to paint a rosy picture of Bulgaria's acceptance of the term Balkan, going as far as to say that historically, Bulgarians are the only ones who have considered it a positive term as opposed to other Balkan countries. While that may be true to some extent (the Balkan mountain range is in fact located in Bulgaria which could contextualize that), their nationalism and territorial pretensions towards their neighbors are also very well-documented and attest to the fact that they do not put their Balkan identity first as she implies.
Another thing I struggled with a bit at the start was the references to specific arguments from Edward Said's Orientalism, the more complex ones which I found difficult to follow as I haven't read it yet and thus lacked the context. However, there has never been a better time to read Said than right now, so I will be rectifying that mistake and adding it to my to-read list immediately.
First off, I want to say how much I appreciate when an author has their own voice and infuses the text they are writing with their personality. I went into this expecting a dense, mentally challenging read, which it did end up being and it was very rewarding. However, it was Todorova's witty and at times sarcastic criticisms of the West's hypocrisies that made it an entertaining read which I did not expect from a political and historiographical book.
That being said, this book is clearly aimed at a Western audience as it deconstructs and contextualizes the historical, cultural, and political background of the term Balkan(s) which much of the West had a hand in shaping and then shaming. Todorova sets out to define the particular ostracization of Balkan people and countries by the West, inspired by Edward Said's Orientalism, and as a result coins the term "balkanism". As a Balkan person who has resided in a Western country for nearly a decade (and frankly, even before that), a lot of the arguments presented supporting Balkanism as a specific form of prejudice felt obvious to me from personal experience, as I imagine they would be for other Balkan people.
That's not to imply that there's no educational value in this book for Balkan people! If anything, I found the chronological historical analysis of the term and the insight into the religious and geopolitical realities of empires during Ottoman rule an extremely valuable contextualization to the (likely flawed and biased) history knowledge I gained in school. Likewise, it was interesting to learn more about the individual histories of Balkan countries and how that shaped their adoption of the term Balkan and what it means to them. It also gave those arguments I "intrinsically knew", concrete political terms which will certainly help me with political analysis in the future. I think every Balkan person would benefit from delving deeper into their neighbors' histories and examining their place in the European tapestry.
Despite her sober and clear-cut teardown of Western prejudices, Todorova is not without her biases either. She rightfully criticizes Romania's interwar intellectuals for their ties to, and in some cases, outright support for Nazism and the Iron Guard, responsible for some of the most gruesome extermination campaigns of Jewish people in WW2, as a way to distance themselves from the Balkans. Yet, she conveniently sidesteps her own country's membership in the Axis powers and complicity in the Holocaust which in times of such widespread historical revisionism is extremely concerning. Moreover, she tends to paint a rosy picture of Bulgaria's acceptance of the term Balkan, going as far as to say that historically, Bulgarians are the only ones who have considered it a positive term as opposed to other Balkan countries. While that may be true to some extent (the Balkan mountain range is in fact located in Bulgaria which could contextualize that), their nationalism and territorial pretensions towards their neighbors are also very well-documented and attest to the fact that they do not put their Balkan identity first as she implies.
Another thing I struggled with a bit at the start was the references to specific arguments from Edward Said's Orientalism, the more complex ones which I found difficult to follow as I haven't read it yet and thus lacked the context. However, there has never been a better time to read Said than right now, so I will be rectifying that mistake and adding it to my to-read list immediately.
Read
January 18, 2022karl marx’ın “hayalet metaforu”nu balkanlara uygulayan maria todovora, imagining the balkans (oxford university press) olarak basılan ve dilimize iletişim yayınları tarafından kazandırılan bu kitabında avrupa’nın kendi içindeki ötekisi olan balkanları ele alıyor.
todovora’ya göre balkanlar avrupa’nın üvey çocuğudur. kendi içinde ötekisidir, batıyla doğu arasında kalmış bir toplumdur. ne kadar avrupa kıtası içinde olsa da…
zamanında oryantalist mantıkla doğu hakkında kurulan fantezilerin şimdi balkanlar hakkında kurulduğunu ve balkanlardan çok farklı bir imajın batı yazınında dolaştığını söyleyen todovora, bunun için kötü kelime olarak “balkanlaşmak” (balkanisation) tabirinin akademik ve gündelik dilde batı düşüncesindeki karşılığın söyler: parçalanmak!
balkanlar, gerçekte böyle midir? kitapta bu konu üzerinde çok fazla durulmaz. balkanların böyle görünmesine ne neden olmuştur? buna daha fazla odaklanır yazar.
yazar kitabında şu konuya da dikkat çeker, balkanlarda da avrupa farklı bir imaja sahiptir. çoğu balkan vatandaşı kendilerini avrupalı olarak görmez. hatta fransa, ingiltere gibi ülkelere gidenlere “avrupa’ya gitti” denir, zira kendileri bu kıtayı sahiplenmez. bu imaj onlara zorla mı aşılanmıştır yoksa tersine, avrupalı oldukları düşüncesi mi dışarıdan gelmiştir bilinmez. ama ironik bir çatışma; yunan kurtuluş savaşında avrupa’dan gelen gönüllülerin döndüklerinde beraberlerinde götürdüğü balkan imajında olmuştur: çoğu yunanlıları büyük bir medeniyetin torunları olarak görerek gelmiş fakat döndüklerinde onların çobanlardan ibaret olduğunu hatta türklerin daha medeni olduğunu söylemiştir.
yazar, kitabında ilginç söylemler de ortaya atıyor:
“balkanlardaki kıyımların çoğu defa avrupa boyutunda olmadığı ortadadır. (sf.22)”
buradan önemli bir şey çıkarabiliriz, todovora da balkanları avrupa olarak görmüyor!
edward said’den oldukça etkilendiği (ki zaten öğrencisidir) her halinden okunan yazarın, kitabında said’e yer vermediği bölüm neredeyse yok.
emil cioran, ki kendisi severek okuduğum bir yazardır, kendi halkından “köylülük ve cehalet fışkıran” diye bahseder. burada aslında temel bir detay gözden kaçmamalıdır, batı yazınındaki barbar doğu imajının aynısı, doğu entelektüelleri ile kendi halkı arasında da simüle edilir. i̇şte balkan toplumu da kendi içinde bu ikiliğe sahip. balkan entelektüelleri kendilerini inatla avrupa’nın parçası olarak görürler. tıpkı balkan sözünün türkçe olmasına tahammül edemeyen milliyetçiler gibi onlar da bu sözü istemez ve ülkelerinin tipik avrupa ülkesi olduğunu iddia ederler.
bu ikilem türkiye’de niyazi berkes tarafından çok iyi dile getirilmiş:
“türkiye bugün ne batılı ne de doğulu bir ulustur: hristiyan, sosyalist veya kapitalist bir toluluğa da mensup değildir… ne asyalı’dır, ne avrupalı.” (akt. todovora, imagining the balkans)
işte todovora’nın temel vurgusu bunun benzeridir. balkanlar, ne avrupalıdır, ne asyalı, ne doğudur ne kuzey, ne rusya’dır ne almanya. balkanlar en nihayetinde kendi içinde bile farklı kültürlere sahip olduklarından ötürü, her biri farklı değerlendirilmelidir.
todovora’nın bana göre düştüğü en büyük yanılgı, aslında balkanlar şöyledir böyledir bize böyle davranılıyor derken kendi taşıdığı kimlikten, yani bir balkanlı kimliğinden dışarı çıkamamasıdır. oryantalizmi eleştirirken doğu-batı ikilemini yeniden yaratırken düşülen hata, todovora’da da var. üstelik, “biz” derken “siz” nasıl öteki haline geliyorsa, “avrupa” “balkanlara” x şeklinde davranıyor dendiğinde ikilem yeniden yaratılmış olur.
türkiye’de de biz avrupalıyız veya avrupalı değiliz derkenki o “bizi kabullenin” meydan okuması, içten içe farklılığın da dramını içermiyor mu? eğer avrupalı olsaydık, bunu söylemek zorunda kalmazdık.
her kesimden insanın rahatlıkla okuyabileceği, öğretici bir kitap.
(Mehmet Baran)
todovora’ya göre balkanlar avrupa’nın üvey çocuğudur. kendi içinde ötekisidir, batıyla doğu arasında kalmış bir toplumdur. ne kadar avrupa kıtası içinde olsa da…
zamanında oryantalist mantıkla doğu hakkında kurulan fantezilerin şimdi balkanlar hakkında kurulduğunu ve balkanlardan çok farklı bir imajın batı yazınında dolaştığını söyleyen todovora, bunun için kötü kelime olarak “balkanlaşmak” (balkanisation) tabirinin akademik ve gündelik dilde batı düşüncesindeki karşılığın söyler: parçalanmak!
balkanlar, gerçekte böyle midir? kitapta bu konu üzerinde çok fazla durulmaz. balkanların böyle görünmesine ne neden olmuştur? buna daha fazla odaklanır yazar.
yazar kitabında şu konuya da dikkat çeker, balkanlarda da avrupa farklı bir imaja sahiptir. çoğu balkan vatandaşı kendilerini avrupalı olarak görmez. hatta fransa, ingiltere gibi ülkelere gidenlere “avrupa’ya gitti” denir, zira kendileri bu kıtayı sahiplenmez. bu imaj onlara zorla mı aşılanmıştır yoksa tersine, avrupalı oldukları düşüncesi mi dışarıdan gelmiştir bilinmez. ama ironik bir çatışma; yunan kurtuluş savaşında avrupa’dan gelen gönüllülerin döndüklerinde beraberlerinde götürdüğü balkan imajında olmuştur: çoğu yunanlıları büyük bir medeniyetin torunları olarak görerek gelmiş fakat döndüklerinde onların çobanlardan ibaret olduğunu hatta türklerin daha medeni olduğunu söylemiştir.
yazar, kitabında ilginç söylemler de ortaya atıyor:
“balkanlardaki kıyımların çoğu defa avrupa boyutunda olmadığı ortadadır. (sf.22)”
buradan önemli bir şey çıkarabiliriz, todovora da balkanları avrupa olarak görmüyor!
edward said’den oldukça etkilendiği (ki zaten öğrencisidir) her halinden okunan yazarın, kitabında said’e yer vermediği bölüm neredeyse yok.
emil cioran, ki kendisi severek okuduğum bir yazardır, kendi halkından “köylülük ve cehalet fışkıran” diye bahseder. burada aslında temel bir detay gözden kaçmamalıdır, batı yazınındaki barbar doğu imajının aynısı, doğu entelektüelleri ile kendi halkı arasında da simüle edilir. i̇şte balkan toplumu da kendi içinde bu ikiliğe sahip. balkan entelektüelleri kendilerini inatla avrupa’nın parçası olarak görürler. tıpkı balkan sözünün türkçe olmasına tahammül edemeyen milliyetçiler gibi onlar da bu sözü istemez ve ülkelerinin tipik avrupa ülkesi olduğunu iddia ederler.
bu ikilem türkiye’de niyazi berkes tarafından çok iyi dile getirilmiş:
“türkiye bugün ne batılı ne de doğulu bir ulustur: hristiyan, sosyalist veya kapitalist bir toluluğa da mensup değildir… ne asyalı’dır, ne avrupalı.” (akt. todovora, imagining the balkans)
işte todovora’nın temel vurgusu bunun benzeridir. balkanlar, ne avrupalıdır, ne asyalı, ne doğudur ne kuzey, ne rusya’dır ne almanya. balkanlar en nihayetinde kendi içinde bile farklı kültürlere sahip olduklarından ötürü, her biri farklı değerlendirilmelidir.
todovora’nın bana göre düştüğü en büyük yanılgı, aslında balkanlar şöyledir böyledir bize böyle davranılıyor derken kendi taşıdığı kimlikten, yani bir balkanlı kimliğinden dışarı çıkamamasıdır. oryantalizmi eleştirirken doğu-batı ikilemini yeniden yaratırken düşülen hata, todovora’da da var. üstelik, “biz” derken “siz” nasıl öteki haline geliyorsa, “avrupa” “balkanlara” x şeklinde davranıyor dendiğinde ikilem yeniden yaratılmış olur.
türkiye’de de biz avrupalıyız veya avrupalı değiliz derkenki o “bizi kabullenin” meydan okuması, içten içe farklılığın da dramını içermiyor mu? eğer avrupalı olsaydık, bunu söylemek zorunda kalmazdık.
her kesimden insanın rahatlıkla okuyabileceği, öğretici bir kitap.
(Mehmet Baran)
January 16, 2016
It took me an unnaturally long time to finish this book. In my defense. I got about halfway through it in less than a month and just had to put it aside for school. Now that I've graduated, I'm trying to work through more of my books and this was one of the first I finished. It was quite enjoyable for someone interested in these things, but it was a little too academic even for me. I think I would have appreciated it more if I had a PhD or a much more extensive knowledge of the Balkans.
That said, it offered quite a few very interesting insights into the region and did inspire me to want to read more Balkan history. It was just really dense, too dense for pleasure reading in my opinion.
That said, it offered quite a few very interesting insights into the region and did inspire me to want to read more Balkan history. It was just really dense, too dense for pleasure reading in my opinion.
September 3, 2011
Książka Todorovej przedstawia podejście zachodniej Europy i podróżników pochodzących z takich krajów jak Wielka Brytania, Francja czy Niemcy do Grecji, Bułgarii, Słowenii, Rumunii, Chorwacji i pozostałych krajów "bałkańskich".
July 21, 2017
It has good points, but the author has enlarged the book without reason, the whole book can be summarized up in a few arguments: Crusade wasn't initiated by the Balkans, religious wars either, nor the nationalism, nor the anti-semitism.
March 25, 2016
Good but confusingly organized.
July 13, 2025
„Bałkany wyobrażone” Marii Todorovej to dzieło, które na nowo uczy, czym jest stereotyp – jak powstaje, jak się go utrwala i jak może stać się narzędziem politycznym, kulturowym i cywilizacyjnym. To książka fundamentalna nie tylko dla badaczy, ale i dla każdego, kto chce zrozumieć, jak Zachód przez wieki patrzył na Bałkany – z góry, z dystansem, a często z pogardą.
Todorova z chirurgiczną precyzją rozkłada na czynniki pierwsze pojęcie „bałkanizacji”, pokazując, że termin ten nie narodził się z faktów, lecz z imaginacji – z projekcji Zachodu, który potrzebował „innego”, egzotycznego, nieuporządkowanego terytorium, by samemu czuć się bardziej „cywilizowanym”. Autorka – wywodząca się z regionu, który opisuje – łączy naukowy rygor z osobistą wrażliwością. To dzięki temu ta książka nie jest suchą rozprawą akademicką, lecz emocjonalną, miejscami prowokującą podróżą po historii percepcji.
W epoce nowych podziałów i kulturowych etykietek, Todorova stawia ważne pytanie: kto ma prawo mówić, co jest „centrum”, a co „peryferią”? „Bałkany wyobrażone” to nie tylko analiza konkretnego regionu, ale uniwersalna lekcja o tym, jak tworzymy wyobrażone mapy świata – mapy uprzedzeń, nadziei, lęków i iluzji.
Dla polskiego czytelnika – obywatela kraju balansującego między Wschodem a Zachodem – lektura ta ma wymiar szczególny. Pomaga zrozumieć, że prowincjonalność to nie geografia, lecz narracja, w którą można uwierzyć lub którą można świadomie rozbroić.
Todorova z chirurgiczną precyzją rozkłada na czynniki pierwsze pojęcie „bałkanizacji”, pokazując, że termin ten nie narodził się z faktów, lecz z imaginacji – z projekcji Zachodu, który potrzebował „innego”, egzotycznego, nieuporządkowanego terytorium, by samemu czuć się bardziej „cywilizowanym”. Autorka – wywodząca się z regionu, który opisuje – łączy naukowy rygor z osobistą wrażliwością. To dzięki temu ta książka nie jest suchą rozprawą akademicką, lecz emocjonalną, miejscami prowokującą podróżą po historii percepcji.
W epoce nowych podziałów i kulturowych etykietek, Todorova stawia ważne pytanie: kto ma prawo mówić, co jest „centrum”, a co „peryferią”? „Bałkany wyobrażone” to nie tylko analiza konkretnego regionu, ale uniwersalna lekcja o tym, jak tworzymy wyobrażone mapy świata – mapy uprzedzeń, nadziei, lęków i iluzji.
Dla polskiego czytelnika – obywatela kraju balansującego między Wschodem a Zachodem – lektura ta ma wymiar szczególny. Pomaga zrozumieć, że prowincjonalność to nie geografia, lecz narracja, w którą można uwierzyć lub którą można świadomie rozbroić.
Read
February 4, 2023“By being geographically inextricable from Europe, yet culturally constructed as “the other” within, the Balkans have been able to absorb conveniently a number of externalized political, ideological, and cultural frustrations stemming from ten- sions and contradictions inherent to the regions and societies outside the Balkans. Balkanism became, in time, a convenient substitute for the emotional discharge that orientalism provided, exempting the West from charges of racism, colonialism, eurocentrism, and Christian intolerance against Islam. After all, the Balkans are in Europe; they are white; they are predominantly Christian, and therefore the external- ization of frustrations on them can circumvent the usual racial or religious bias alle- gations. As in the case of the Orient, the Balkans have served as a repository of negative characteristics against which a positive and self-congratulatory image of the “Euro- pean” and the “West” has been constructed. With the reemergence of East and orientalism as independent semantic values, the Balkans are left in Europe’s thrall, anticivilization, alter ego, the dark side within. “
March 1, 2021
Building on the tradition of Edward Said and Benedict Anderson, the author provides a comprehensive history of the invention, orientalisation and othering of the Balkans grounding balkanism historically in the Ottoman Period of the 16th century onwards
The book also does an excellent job pushing back on the ghettoisation of the Balkans by covering the history of attitudes and views towards the Balkans, although this did get esoteric at times, as well as exploring how and why these came about including prejudices against the Slavs compared to more favourable views towards the Greeks
Particularly interesting was the use of flawed racial science by British and American academics to justify their racist sentiments towards the Balkans
and the construction of the mythic Central Europe as a grouping of Eastern European/Balkan countries deemed acceptable/white enough at a particular point in time
Highly recommended for anyone interested in the Balkans
The book also does an excellent job pushing back on the ghettoisation of the Balkans by covering the history of attitudes and views towards the Balkans, although this did get esoteric at times, as well as exploring how and why these came about including prejudices against the Slavs compared to more favourable views towards the Greeks
Particularly interesting was the use of flawed racial science by British and American academics to justify their racist sentiments towards the Balkans
and the construction of the mythic Central Europe as a grouping of Eastern European/Balkan countries deemed acceptable/white enough at a particular point in time
Highly recommended for anyone interested in the Balkans
January 8, 2024
Balkanlar nedir, Doğu Avrupa nedir, Orta Avrupa nedir, hangi ülkenin hangi coğrafi bölgeye ait olduğuna kim nasıl karar verir gibi sorulara bir tarihçi gözüyle cevap arayan ve bu konuyla ilgili mevcut argümanların eleştirisini yapan bir kitap. Zaman zaman çok detaya düştüğü oluyor. Akıcı bir dili yok. 14. yy ve sonrasındaki gezi yazarlığının farklı coğrafyaların tanınmasında ve tanıtılmasında ne kadar etkili olduğunu görüyoruz. Özellikle hangi milletten gezginlerin balkanlardaki gözlemlerini ne şekilde anlattıklarını görüyoruz. Kaçınılmaz olarak Osmanlı İmp. tüm balkan coğrafyası üzerindeki etkisi ile ilgili de çokça detay açıklama ve çarpıcı tespitler var.
February 28, 2023
This book looks at the Balkans' image in the West (both historically and in the present day), and claims that Western writers have unfairly maligned the region. It is an interesting thesis, and the author does a good job of explaining how the region is generally viewed, and why this view tends to be inaccurate. She doesn't really present an alternative view, however, which I see as a missed opportunity.
March 24, 2023
This book is a pretty excellent read around the history of what the Balkans. I particularly enjoy reading through the wide range of the western world misconceptions, fundamentally spun by sheer ignorance. It's at time a bit too long to read in certain passages, but nevertheless the author did a wonderful job in researching and presenting the different themes discussed along the book
January 21, 2025
The Balkanist bible -- fantastic book (obviously). The interrogation of the way that the word Balkan is represented in different Balkan/South Slavic linguistics is especially impressive. I do think Todorova is overly critical of Said in her introduction. This may have been addressed in the 2007 updated edition, however, which I have not yet read.
January 26, 2025
Spodziewałam się, że książka o Bałkanach może nie być łatwą lekturą. Ale nie spodziewałam się, że tak będzie, ponieważ sięgam po rozprawę naukową. Jakaś 1/5 książki to przypisy i bibliografia. Może jest to dobra książka, ale nie tego oczekiwałam sięgając po coś z serii Sulina. Od pewnego momentu bardziej kartkowałam niż czytałam.
December 10, 2020
Truly enlightening work with lots of groundbreaking ideas. Must read for anyone working in the field of Balkan studies, Turkology, etc.
The style of writing is a bit complicated, so progress was slow and frequently needed to backtrack. Huge bibliography with interesting books to read.
The style of writing is a bit complicated, so progress was slow and frequently needed to backtrack. Huge bibliography with interesting books to read.
August 9, 2021
Dzieło przepotężne i niezwykle wartościowe, ale kiedy 2/3 książki to zdania na ponad cztery linijki czytanie jest naprawdę bolesne.
April 4, 2023
The author provides a refreshing interpretation of the Balkans- it's antithetical to Kalpan's horrendous "Balkan Ghosts."
July 12, 2023
Przydałoby się niewątpliwie posłowie drugie i trzecie, bo czas mija. Ale i tak warto!
November 8, 2023
Incorporates a LOT of theory from Foucault and Derrida which makes the wordage sometimes too complicated for its own good. Which is odd considering that the argument is so simple
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews