This name by itself doesn't say much, as its bearer, a very prolific writer, was "cut down" at the roots. Despite having significant intellectual potential and being exceptionally diligent, Dušan Knežević remained completely unknown to our cultural public as a writer.
The title highlights his father's name because he, too, despite being a great man, unfortunately remained unknown to the cultural public. However, he cast a large shadow over his son, Dušan.
We won't delve into explaining Jovan Knežević's merits or how his fame as the founder of the first Serbian professional theater was attributed to Jovan Đorđević, as this is thoroughly explained in the book The Role of the People of Novi Bečej in the Development of Serbian Theater. Moreover, Dušan Knežević himself explains this in his article published in the Pančevo newspaper Naše Gore List, which will be largely presented here. What we want to emphasize is that Dušan was handicapped by the fact that his father had such great merits, which hindered him in certain intellectual circles of the time. We also want to showcase Dušan's perseverance and great work ethic, inherited from his father Jovan.
Dušan was born in Vranjevo, and by the age of eight, he had lost his father. Along with his brother Stefan and their mother Jelena, they were left almost without any income or means for a normal life. Seeing the exceptional intelligence of her children, their mother sold the house in Vranjevo and secured just enough funds for their education. Dušan completed teacher training school in Sombor in 1873/74. He first taught in his hometown of Vranjevo as a temporary teacher (as recorded in the church chronicle of the Orthodox Church in Vranjevo) from March 1874 to September of the same year, when Miša Milošević, also from Vranjevo, was appointed as the teacher, likely having greater protection and support from the municipal and church authorities of the time. Dušan then went to teach in Pardanj, today's Medja. He didn't stay there long either, as by 1878, he wrote a letter to Ilija Okrugić-Sremac from Berkasovo, a small village near Šid.
We can only trace his career through his letters, which are preserved in the Manuscript Department of Matica Srpska in Novi Sad and the Manuscript Department of the National Library of Serbia in Belgrade.
These letters reveal that, in addition to the mentioned places, he also taught in Mađar Čanad and even in Šabac. It is not known how long he stayed in each of these places, but it can be concluded that his stay in some places was relatively short, and that the letters relate to the years of his youth and the beginning of his literary creation.
By the age of 23, Dušan had already written 10 novellas, which he submitted to Matica Srpska for an award, the book Family Life for which Matica announced a prize of 50 ducats, several poems, and a few shorter plays. Unfortunately for him, and perhaps even more so for Serbian culture, none of these works were published or made available in any form. The exception is his articles, one of which I will present in detail.
Dušan, whether due to the resistance that Serbian intellectuals around Matica Srpska had towards the works of his father Jovan, or due to his fiery nature, as evident in the letters he sent to contemporary writers and Matica Srpska itself, encountered "closed doors." He wrote about this injustice to the writer Ilija Okrugić-Sremac, Paja Marković-Adamov, the editor and publisher of Brankovo Kolo, concluding that writers could not come from the ranks of teachers, but had to be at least professors. He also attributed his lack of success to his efforts to prove that his father, Jovan Knežević, was the founder of the first Serbian theater, not Jovan Đorđević, as recorded in our theater history. Additionally, Dušan criticized the unsuccessful but published poems and other writings of weak authors who were favorites of influential people around Matica Srpska and the public media in Novi Sad.
We will deviate from the chronological order of events and present the article in which Dušan proved who the founder of the first Serbian theater was, published in the Pančevo newspaper Naše Gore List, before the letters he sent to Matica Srpska and individual writers. We do this because it seems more important for readers to understand the main causes of the resistance from writers and intellectuals around Matica Srpska towards the works of Dušan Knežević before presenting the details from his letters, which form part of the mosaic that was woven around Dušan's creative work. Unfortunately, due to human envy, and perhaps also a bit of cowardice, from those in responsible positions in Serbian culture—since Jovan Đorđević was already a very prominent figure in Belgrade and Serbia—Dušan Knežević remained unnoticed and unknown not only in the history of Serbian culture but also in his hometown of Vranjevo, today's Novi Bečej.
The Serbian National Theatre, in the newspaper "Pozorište," issue no. 50 dated December 11, 1873, calls on readers to gather materials and write the history of Serbian theatre. In this appeal, which was presented as an editorial, the Editorial Board emphasized that they had repeatedly, "for several years now," announced rewards for a work titled "Outline of the History of Serbian Theatre," but no writer had come forward to take on the task. The Editorial Board of "Pozorište" speculated that the main reason for this was the lack of materials for such an important endeavor. Therefore, they asked readers and all those with knowledge on the subject to write it down and submit it, and if they had any newspapers or books containing similar notes, to either submit or sell them to "Pozorište."
In this appeal, special emphasis was placed on the proposal by "the dramaturg of the National Theatre in Belgrade, Mr. Jovan Đorđević, made to the Literary Committee of Matica Srpska." This proposal was reviewed and accepted by the Literary Committee at its meeting on November 27. The Editorial Board informed readers that in the following issues of the newspaper, a section would be opened for "all notes that could serve as material for the history of our theatre." Here is Jovan Đorđević's proposal "word for word":
"I propose, therefore, that 'Matica Srpska' 1.) Personally asks Mr. Dilber, Atanasije Nikolić, N. Đurković, St. Dobrić, and A. Popović (Popović is from Vranjevo - note by L.M.) to each note down what they remember, either from their own work in the theatre or what they recall others doing in their time, and that these notes be submitted to Matica Srpska, who will preserve them as material for the history of Serbian theatre. 2.) Issues a call, asking everyone who has either printed or written documents from any period of our theatre (such as old books, newspapers, theatre announcements, letters, notes, memoirs, etc.) or who remembers something themselves, or has heard something interesting from others related to our theatre, (even if it is just theatrical anecdotes or curiosities), to submit or report it to Matica Srpska. 3.) Selects a few of its members who would themselves collect, note, and transcribe isolated notes on theatrical activity from old newspapers and books, evaluate the collected theatre material gathered through the call, keep it on record, and in due time present their opinion to Matica Srpska on the method and plan for utilizing the gathered material to write the history of Serbian theatre and how this should be written."
The entire review of materials for the history of Serbian theatre published in "Pozorište" from issues 51 to 60 in 1873 was primarily based on data from Jovan Đorđević and contributions from 2-3 other participants in those events.
Among these few contributions was an article by Andrija Putić, a priest from Serbian Čanad, published in the newspaper "Bačvanin" and then fully reprinted in "Pozorište." Putić, with great malice, criticizes the role of Jovan Knežević in the Čanad amateur theatre group, as he sought to ingratiate himself with Jovan Đorđević, while glorifying himself and Stevan Protić, and even a Jewish innkeeper from Serbian Čanad, Karl May, whose inn was called "Black Eagle" - a symbol of Germany.
This article was extensively exploited by Jovan Đorđević, who, at one point, referred to Serbian Čanad as Bethlehem, where Serbian theatre was born. Unfortunately, Borivoje Stojković based his viewpoints on these claims, without scientific verification, in his comprehensive book: "The History of Serbian Theatre from the Middle Ages to Modern Times."
Dušan Knežević attempted to refute Andrija Putić's claims in the newspaper "Pozorište," but the Editorial Board did not accept his article, so he had to publish it in the Pančevo newspaper "Naše Gore List," issue no. 8, dated February 24, 1885. Unfortunately, this article was not taken into account when writing the history of Serbian theatre, except for a mention by Dr. Mihovil Tomandl in his book: "Serbian Theatre in Vojvodina."
We present a somewhat shortened version of that article published in "Naše Gore List" under the title "Something About Our Theatre." We wish to showcase the intellect and literacy of Dušan Knežević in refuting the falsehoods presented by Andrija Putić and to highlight the origin of the injustice done to the creativity of Dušan Knežević.
"In response to the fact that in issues 14, 15, and 16 of last year's "Bačvanin" a piece was published under the title 'How the Serbian National Theatre Was Established' by Mr. Andrija Putić, parish priest of Serbian Čanad, I warmly ask the esteemed editorial board of 'Naše Gore List' to allow me to say a few words on this important matter, on behalf of someone who has long since passed away and would have had much to say (referring to his father, Jovan Knežević - note by L.M.)."
"As for the establishment of the Serbian theatre, there is a great deal of misunderstanding and ignorance among Serbian writers, as if its origin is so old that no one could remember it, when in reality, it is barely a quarter of a century old. Despite two 'open letters' issued in two printed sheets, someone still disputes here and there the truth that Jovan Knežević was the founder of the Serbian theatre. In literature, it is asserted that Serbian 'theatre' existed even under Joakim Vujić, but the matter must be judged much more maturely. One swallow does not make a summer, and similarly, one performance in one place or a theatrical parade in another does not constitute a theatre. The fact that two or three people gathered and gave one or at most two performances in their town, as was mainly the case in Kragujevac, Belgrade, Novi Sad, Kikinda, Bečkerek – that is still nothing, for those performances were not given out of love for art but for entertainment, just as speeches are given, and they were not given by artists who bear the name actors, but by private individuals, and if we were to count that as theatre, then we should also with full right include the performances given by children in some places as theatrical."
"Theatre as a cultural institution requires certain organizations, and there was none of that in any respect before Jovan Knežević. Some theatrical performances were indeed attempted before him, but not for a cultural mission and very insignificantly; some started something but did not finish, or gave one or two performances and then went home. Due to that weak perseverance, lacking any equipment, and not traveling to Serbian towns, they remained in obscurity, so the people know nothing about them. But here and there, a white crow appears and writes about this or that, which seems more like self-promotion, for the people know every true worker of theirs, and if they do not recognize someone, then that person is not who they claim to be. Either such a worker did very little, or started something and did not finish, as is the case with Mr. Andrija Putić."
"...Jovan Knežević was with the theatre in all Serbian towns, in all the larger places on this side of the Danube and Sava, except Pančevo, probably because it was difficult to bring theatre into the Frontier at that time. If we go out onto the street and ask people, they will say that the first to open the shrine of Serbian Thalia was Jovan Knežević. 'Srpsko Kolo' also acknowledged this in its 40th issue of 1883, and this will probably be confirmed by the requested obituary for Jovan Knežević at the session of the Literary Department of 'Matica Srpska' in 1864, as found in the 'Letopis' of the same year. Just as politicians and Serbian leaders gained popularity among the people through their work, so did Knežević through his work in his field."
"He was the first among Serbs to organize Serbian theatre in the same way as it is done among other civilized nations: his performers were actors, each had their respective role, each earned a monthly salary according to merit, he procured 'wardrobes,' stage props, books, in short, everything that a theatre requires. That structure, that unity, and that serious and persistent work in the field of theatre did not exist before him, and therefore it is very laughable and wrong to claim that Serbian theatre existed before him..." "The National Theatre separated from Knežević's like a loaf from bread..."
"Disdain for Jov. Knežević was also stirred by Mr. Andrija Putić, a Serbian-Canadian priest, who wrote in 'Bačvanin' about the origin of the Serbian national theater, instead of writing simply about the Canadian theater. In this article, he highlights himself as the main leader, while it is evident from the entire context that neither he nor Steva Protić were called to perform the theater task, as they never even dreamed of it. Instead, a German theater happened to come by, and from this chance, they too gave a performance of 'Hajduke,' and on that occasion—according to what is told from Čanad—they distributed what they had gathered, leaving nothing for the young men. This phenomenon would have remained buried forever in Čanad, and they would have passed away just like other old theatrical performances, if not for Jov. Knežević and his six or more companions. Knežević was not disturbed by the case; he lived several miles away from Čanad, having seen some amateur performances since his youth, before the 1847 uprising, and having traveled to theaters in Zagreb, Belgrade, and beyond. He wrote plays, as evidenced by a randomly found original—so he was driven by the idea of establishing the Serbian theater, not merely by chance like Mr. Putić and Protić. Without Knežević, the Čanad society would not have been found, but Mr. Putić will not say this, and those who carefully read the end of his article see that he wants to further discredit it."
"... When Knežević arrived among them in Čanad with about seven companions from Vranjevo and Kikinda, he immediately noticed that one of them, no matter who, needed to have a wardrobe like a Serb, not like Čivutin Karlo Maj from Čanad. He brought all the theatrical works because the Čanadians knew nothing else but 'Hajduke.' After giving a few performances in Vel. St. Mikluš and Kikinda, Maj returned to his home for the purchased wardrobe, and Mr. Putić followed him, and thus the group dispersed... Mr. Putić says that Knežević was also on 'the bill' together with Georg (representative of Maj—note by LM), but does not mention that this was what the group demanded, as there was little trust in Mr. Putić or Protić, who pocketed everything, thinking they could do as they pleased with the uneducated young men."
"It is ridiculous when someone who has fled from battle seeks acclaim. Mr. Putić himself says that he returned home from Kikinda, and why? Because theater was not his task. He represented by chance and is not even suitable as an actor—though he praises himself—since he is a very short person; what a caricature for such a short man to represent Mileta Arambaša! Knežević saw this well. And Protić, again, represented nothing, so neither of them could be of any use to the theater in the future. They should have gone home with Georg and given up on uninvited work. The society dispersed—just as Mr. Putić says in his article—from that disintegration, new companions emerged, and Jovan Knežević founded the permanent Serbian theater that toured all major Serbian places. Arriving in Novi Sad, he made the greatest sensation as evidenced by 'Srpski Dnevnik' and 'Danica' from 1860 and 1861. Mr. Putić should know that when one’s house collapses, and another builds a new one, the discussion about the old house ceases. The theater he worked in dispersed, and so did he. What others later created was their own effort and struggle! The people do not know Putić!"
"Jov. Knežević is the first organizer and founder of the Serbian theater; he opened the temple of Thalia, and later the national committee accepted him. Even then, when the Novi Sad committee extracted the core from his theater, he did not falter but continued working until his death. This is called being aware of one's calling."
"In addition to everything Dušan Knežević presented in his article, Jovan Đorđević, after more than 30 years from Jovan Knežević’s death, attributed all the merits to that Čanad group and even equates Stevan Protić with Knežević, highlighting him first when mentioning them as two men 'whom providence preserved to take this tender plant...'. It might be more credible to expose the abuse of history if I quote his words written in the 'Pozorišta' magazine numbers 14 and 15 from 1896, in which among other inaccuracies, he writes:
'Providence preserved two men, I would say, just to take this tender plant, this young sprout into their arms and somewhat sustain it, and later hand it over to the Serbian people for further care. These two men are Stevan Protić from Canada and Jovan Knežević from Vranjevo, both directors of theater groups before 1848.'
I do not know which groups Stevan Protić was a director of before 1848! B. Stojković does state that he was appointed manager of the Canadian group by Karlo Maj, a wine merchant from Čanad, but this happened in 1860, page 123 of his History of Theater. Before 1848, Stevan Protić was no older than 12-13 years.
Đorđević further writes about Čanad in the mentioned issues of 'Pozorišta':
'In that new Bethlehem, thirty-five years ago a young sprout, Serbian theater, was born...'
Clearly, Đorđević was aware that history is what is 'written,' and so he committed this forgery to avoid mentioning Vranjevo, as Knežević would immediately emerge as the founder and creator of the first Serbian theater, and Jovan Đorđević would not become the father of Serbian theater.'
We must also present something from Dušan Knežević’s article to understand the reasons why he faced resistance from Matica and other influential public voices of the time. To highlight how difficult it was to organize a theater under those conditions, Dušan presents the following:
'We know that Jov. St. Popović and Subotić wrote theatrical works, but it is truly a miracle how they did not establish a theater group to revive their works. Jov. St. Popović did something in Belgrade, indeed with local amateurs, among whom was Jovan Knežević, but all of it was insignificant, from one day to the next; where it was born, there it died. Subotić did nothing for the group, Jaokim Vujić did, but he also fell into his insignificant beginning. What these writers did not do, Jovan Knežević did. Only after Jovan Knežević did Subotić and all of Novi Sad start working furiously.'
'For an idea, one must live and die for it—Jov. Knežević lived for the idea of Serbian theater from his early youth in 1847. Through many attempts, he had to create something eventually, and he created it in Banat where the best conditions for it existed, as in Bačka it would have been difficult to achieve such a thing since there were almost no Bačvans in the acting staff, but mostly Banat people. Did the Novi Sad committee led by Serbian writers live for the idea of theater? No. It was only by chance that they were introduced to it, and that chance was Jovan Knežević, who suddenly burst into Novi Sad with a huge troupe. Perhaps he also felt the necessity for a Serbian theater, but before Knežević, no one took up the work. Only Jov. Knežević can say: I lived for the idea of Serbian theater, no one disturbed me, I nurtured it for years, not just temporarily. He is exalted above all those who came after him. The first shall be last, and the last first; so is it any wonder that Jovan Knežević, marked first by Serbian newspapers, is suddenly last now! Let the national theater never represent 'Pokondirena Tikva,' for it mocks itself!
Mr. Putić wants to place the blame on Knežević in his article for the dispersion of their group in Kikinda. If Knežević were guilty and had embezzled something, why would his troupe have stayed with him and followed him if he had offended them in any way? Putić, Protić, and Georg were abandoned; they lost trust because if they had been as they should and aware of the theater, the troupe would have stayed with them. Mr. Putić says that the Pomorišci laid a 'solid foundation for national theater,' but he also says that the group dispersed after 5-6 performances. Jovan Knežević was not a Pomorišac, nor were the Kikindans who were with the troupe; rather, there were more Dištrikcians in the troupe than Pomorišci. Why speak falsely? Mrs. Draga Ružićka did not follow Putić but Knežević because her father, priest Luka Popović, was from Vranjevo and related to Knežević, so all her brothers and sisters, six in total, joined their Uncle Joca. Mr. Putić’s call to Mrs. Ružićka is in vain.'
'Every discussion ceases: Jovan Knežević is the first organizer and founder of the Serbian theater... This should not even be discussed, but only referred to 'Srpski Dnevnik,' 'Danica,' and Pest's 'Vasarnapi lap,' and the matter is clear. But what shall we do when the Serbian circumstances are as they are! Anyone who has read the theater history material knows that Knežević was belittled (referring to the material published in the 'Pozorište' magazine—note by LM). Those esteemed individuals who gave two or three performances and then went home because they worked hard, while Knežević, with his three years of dedicated work in the theater field until his death, whose actors uphold the glory of both our Serbian and Belgrade theaters, remained insignificant, erased from history. A Beautiful Parade.'
At the end of the mentioned article in 'Naše Gore List,' Dušan Knežević also presents Jovan Knežević’s literary work related to theater and describes the content of the drama 'Generosity and Gratitude,' which he came across by chance through the lawyer Milan Božeski from Pest.
If our historians, or those who collected material in 'Pozorište' and Matica Srpska, had considered only these data and comments presented by Dušan, Jovan Knežević’s son, the history of Serbian theater would be based, if not on absolute truth—which is not always the case with history—on much more reliable foundations. Especially since there were still living intellectuals who were contemporaries of these events, who could have disputed all inaccuracies or corrected them and brought them closer to the judgment of history in a fairer measure.
We embarked on such a detailed presentation of Dušan Knežević’s articles to highlight the reasons why he was eliminated from Serbian literary life in Hungary, and particularly to prove the falsification of Serbian theater history and contribute to its demystification.
Comments