RAZGLABLJANJA Sanja Kalapoš MANIFOLD IDENTITY OF A TERRITORIAL SUBCULTURAL GROUP FROM ZAGREB The discussion of the terms youth, subculture and identity is in this ¡paper based on an example of a territorial subcultural group from Zagreb; the author also questions the practical connection between these ethnological categories The paper shows the complexity and the manifoldncss of identity of members of such a group, as well as the ways this complex and manifold identity was manifested. The final part of the paper discusses the differences between the ethnological and sociologic al perspective in dealing with subcultures (not only the youth subcultures). II we define identity as "a dynamic process of construction and reproduction over time, indirect relaIiorioropposition to Specific other groups and interests" (Lofgreri 1991: JOS), or as "the continuation of existence, that something is exactly what it is. and not something else or something non-existing, "'hat cannot be comprehended without the object it has been in relation with"1 (Mestrovie I9SK: i35, according to C.rbic 1994: 120), it is clear that "in modern and complex societies identity is also complex, and according to this, everv individual can have a manifold identity. That phenomenon is in anthropology called nested identity and it implies the orientation of an individual in a wider cultural and even sulv culmral system" (C>rbic 1994; 122). "We view identities as achieved: not fixed but negotiated products of the ongoing How of interaction By this, we mean that identities are features which people can occasion as relevant in their day lo-day dealings with each other" (Widdicombe and Wooffitt 1995: 131). In this paper 1 would like to illustrate the manifold identity of the members of one of Zagreb's subcultures that was active during the 1960s and 1970s, and by viewing this example 1 would like to offer some new theoretical standpoints for examining the (youth) subcultures and their connections with identity. The group that 1 studied" consisted mainly of boys, larcly of guls. from Marticera Street in Zagreb, which gave the group its name - the Marticevci. The group was the most active (.luring the 1960s arid 1970s, arid that was the time that 1 concentrated on the most. The young people would join the group approximately, at the age of Fourteen (i.e., after they have completed elementary school), although there were even some younger members of the group and they would leave the group approximately at the age < )f twenty-five That is also the age range that defines the term youth. Almost every district of Zagreb situated on the north bank of the Sava river had such a group that defended district's interests' (hraniti interese kvctrta).'' which actually meant controlling the dancings, having loud night motorcycle rounds through their pari of the city, using their territory (svoj tereut to 'sponge oil the money from the passers-ln (zicati novae od ImtlaztiikaJ, etc. The other activities of the group usually included miriOrcriminalactions onc^hergroups' terri lory, .such as breaking the shop-windows or robbing the news-stands, which was not motivated by the material reasons, but by revenge to tile group whose terrilory it was And, last but not least, there was the football cheering, the activity thai played an important role in the lives©/ the Marticevci Most of the Marticevci completed the crafts' schools some ol them even spent some lime in juvenile reformatories and almost all ol them were from the working class background The sociological attitude emphasizes that "a problem common to all sub-cultural theories of delinquent behavior is that of explaining why not all inhabitants of the relev ant neighborhoods appear to become delinquent. On the other hand ii remains apparent that a certain proportion of juveniles in delinquent areas appear to be able lo escape the coercive effects of their environment, A part of the answer probably lies in the detailed organization of the community" (Timms 1971: IS). At this point it has to be stressed that sociologists studied mainly the delinquent districts of different cities and by using this approach they reached their theory of residential differentiation, which cannot be applied in this case As I have already stated, almost every district of Zagreb situated on the north bank of the Sava river had (or has) this kind of subcultural groups. 1 ml only a small number ofthe young inhabitants of these parts of town were (a re) members of such suhcultural groups. Discussing the identities of members of the group, ! shall begin will! the interrelations between members within the group itself, and then move towards the identities tliev create in relation io meml kt.n of i he wider society, Im.se "nn un derstandingofthe interrelationship between individuals, sub-cultural groups and society ought to be central in understanding youth subcultures" (Widdicombe and Wooffitt 1995: 52). Namely, the description of members of the Marticevci group thai I gave abovecan only be applied to one part of the group, I here were also boys of the same age living in the neighbor- All the quotationsfrum the Croatian language trere translated into English hy the author. rhe research llm conducted within my graduate thesis during Fehn,a,y 1994 and April in Zagreh. i talked to aim,t fifteen SS» £ ,77" T 45>'"'j™ «vre memix-rs ofthe Marticevci group.hut the check-research was done I Mtixmojuauben of the Marticevci gmi^tnd »mil*,? of other lemlarialgivups that were active during the sane penud of line. Alt oj my informers remained anonymous Ail the data in the,following section come from my informers, then cessions are indicated hy inverted commas, and the original expressions a>v guvu in brackets. 26 GLASNIK SED 36/1996, št. d RAZGLABLJANJA hood, who belonged to the middle or upper-middle class, attended grammar schools and most of whom now have university degrees The mutual relationship between the two subgroups of the same neighborhood was quite complex -both of them considered themselves to be the Marticevci, ex-i ept that the latter were called "the good kids" (dohra djeca) by the delinquents, while the "delinquent part" ol the group considered themselves to be 'the real Marlicevci." The so-called 'good kids' were not actively present in the group, they were some kind of observers, but they liked to say that they were Marticevci too, while the real Marticevci1 recognized them according to the circumstances. Sometimes the good kidv would get beaten up by members of other territorial ntps who would do this knowing that thev were not able to defend themselves, and then the real Marl ice vci' would, as a rule, recognize their good counterparts and avenge llieni. The difference between these two snl»groups is the liist level ol the differences in then identity - while the first were hein,\> subculture, the lattci were merely doing subculture. As \Yi-ddicombe and Woofliii say, "being a member ... can only be at hieved by having the rigllt grounds Shallow mem bers are merely 'doing'. ... they do not have the correct grounds or reasons. ... The right' or genuine grounds loi membership are lied to individualistic notions such as feel ings, personal desires, intrinsic difference, and to personal motivatit m for realizing or expressing these feelings" ( Width Combe and Wooffitt 1995: I 56- 157). This makes the first difference in the su be u luira I identities of members of such a group From this point on I shall concentrate only on the members who imvsubculture; he . theiones that took active part in ihe subculture and on the identities that were present m their mutual subeultural activities ■'since ihis particular sulx'uituial grouping had primat il\ territorial characteristics, and then all the others, 1 shall begin with the smallest spatial units - districts of town < ktiariori). As ' have already said, almost every district of town had its <>wn subeulitiral group that was in rivalry with identical groups bom other districts. The district idcnitityw.is presented by the protection ol one's territory, i.e., "possessing" parts of tow n where the group was from, as well as some places in oliiei groups' districts. I hose "distant places were most usually disco clubs, busy street coiners, etc. I'heonh way for members of one group to win such a place in other group s territory was to fight for it. while they almost never had to fight over places w ithin their territory. Two neighboring groups would liai e a fight Over st nue I»order area street, square, etc.), but it was not so often. Members of subeultural groups ol that lime were not able to express their mutual territorial identity visually, like their counterparts in Wrsirrn làirope. especially in (treat Britain, because travels abroad were reduced to 111111111111111 and prices ol tiendy 1 knhes were high above the purchasing power 1 >1 w 01 kmg-t lass youth Fashionable clothes that very few people in former ugoslavia managed to get from abroad completely lost l''eir original meaning and obtained a completely new one; tl)r example, according to Widdicombe and Wooffitt, in Great Britain black leather jackets were the most important pari ol visiial identity of tin* young who were low paid, unskilled manual laborers (Witklicombeafi£l Wooffitt 1995: 9), while in tl|e tonner Yugoslavia they w ere w orn by the young of up PL'i'-middle class background, w ho attended grammar S('hoo!s and universities. ' herelore. as a rest tit ol impossibility of achieving visual uni ormity, the distria kl Sit it y was transmitted through some kind of oral communication - members of subeultural groups of each district knew exactly who was a member of which group, who no longer took part in subeultural activities, which group "recruited" new members, and so on. This level of identity, spatially the smallest, was not expressed visually, but through activities and "legends", the so-called creating one s name (stvaranje tmena / In order ta belong to your district (l>i i/iailati svorne heart a), one had to fight to gel the recognition. It meant to defend the district's interests, to get into a light if necessary, and, the most important, to develop a feeling of unity and friendship with co-members oft he gioup from the same district. This means that spatially the smallest level of identity was expressed through the activities of the group for which the members die ¡use Ives say werg most basic lor creating the group and keeping it togethei The nexi level of identity is based on the opposition between the "original" inhabitants of Zagreb and the others. Although the most members of territorial subeultural groups were the I irst general i< m of Zagrebers of their families (most of which 1111 »veil It 1 Zagreb from small towns or rural settings) they ieel significant superiority towards the ones w ho were not born in Zagreb but moved here during their lifetime. This level of identity is common to members of all Zagreb's territorial subeultural groups and M 111 a way equalizes alio! ihem; it 1.111 be most easily observed through an acliv it v common to all the groups the football cheering. There is also some visual expression of identity presented thrf'the group name Marticevci defines a territorial, not a supporting group, 1 cannot treat football supporting activities and gatherings of the members of territorial subeultural groups as a special subculture, but only as common activities, perhaps as situational subculture (as suggested by Fanuko) which in litis case presents spatialh widest and most complex level of identity. Let n>, start from the beginning. The Zagreb component of GLASNIK SED 36/1 996, If. 4 3 RAZGLABLJANJA their identilits is observable during football games between football teams "Croatia" (called "Dinamo" at the time) and "Zagreb". both from Zagreb, and teams from other (Croatian) ci ties. Regardless of which of the two teams the members of subcultural groups support, they would visit the games of both of the teams from Zagreb (excepl when they play against each other), not only in Zagreb, but also in other cities, no mailer how tar they have to travel. When the Zagreb teams would have games with teams from smaller lowns or even villages, the supporters f rom Zagreb would primarily show theii urban identity. In showing it. Zagreb was not perceived as the capital of Croaiia. but simply as a large city, an urban center. Sinee my informers did not emphasize only their Zagreb, but also Croatian identity, il was important for them to attend the games ot any of the Croatian football teams that played against any of the teams from any of the former Yugoslav republics, especially Serbia, for example, the supporters from Zagreb would very often travel to other former Yugoslav republics 10 see a game between "Hajduk". lire team front Split and some oilier team During the last couple of years of existence of football supporters' groups, there have even been created slogans that explicitly showthis "friendship", such as Hajduk' ami Dinamo* are iwo fraternal teams, the whole Croatia is proud ol ihem"' (Lalic 1993: 193) A number of my in(0rmers emphasized thai "they had always been Croats, not only for the last five years", and that 'they had never been afraid of showing that ihcy were Croats'' Their Ovatness was mainly present al such inler republic football games, when, besides the usual supporting and insulting the other team, there were also insults based on each other's nationality. For example, "the Torcida's shouting W e re Croats' was answered by supporters from Belgrade wilh Why arc you complaining to US?'"1 (Lalic 1993: 20(1). and "quite usual name given to Serbian players and supporters was "Gypsies'" (Lalic 1993: 199). Of course, wheft the Croatian supporters went to other republics and insulted the liosis there (or vice versa, which happened on regular basis, i.e. much more often), they would veiy Often end up in police stations where, besides having legal problems, they would often get beaten up. Nevertheless, they considered this kind of supporting to be their contrilnitron to the solution of current political problems and a form of liberating lheir suppressed national feelings Since one of the ma joi tasks of gathering of such groups from the level of city districts up to much wider levels was lighting, they always used every opportunity to get into a fight. If there was not ¡any. they would provoke it, and occasional beatings al police stations did not seem a high price to pay. Since "tim ing the communism the national issue was automatically oppositional. and the manifestations of emphasizing the national created a powerful political echo, it is not odd that the majority of supporters of important teams took over the national discourse" (Fanuko 199b 20). "Football is an ideal situation for experiencing emotions, i.e., for creating and recreating animosities towards other teams, their players antl supporters" (liatlin 1991: 75), and I would like lo add that il also infers the supporters of different regional cultural antl national backgrounds. it also has to be taken inio consideration that the national intolerance or at least disagreements quietly existed during the 1960s and 1970s, and has today been intensified by the war'"into a current social frame within which the relationship friend-enemy is created. This relationship is a constituent part ot all the adolescent groups, so that the playground agression was connected prima rib to national reasons but also to the supporting ones" (Ratlin 1991: 92). Although during that period of lime there were no supporting groups in former Yugoslavia - except forTorcida, which is "the oldest suppi irt-ing group in former Yugoslavia, founded in )950" (Lalic 1993 N5) - a great number of sociological observances concerning today's supporting groups can also be applied to the supporters from 1960s and 1970s, although I have to emphasize again that the reasons for gathering of those subcultural groups were not supporting football teams and that the members were not primarily supporters. Supporting was one of their activities and an indicatoroflheiruit>an( Zagreb) and national (Croatian) identity This example shows that the subcultural identity; i.e., the identity of members ot only one subcultural group is complex and manifold. Besides football supporting, which was no doubt ver\ important, the Marticeuciengaget¡themselves in other activities as w ell They would ionirol tlwiv part of town, their disco clubs, etc. The rules of behavior were strict; a member of a subcultural group was not supposed in come to other group's dancing; if he did, he had to behave as a guest-in other words, he was noi allowed to approach the girls from this tcnitory, to choose songs from the juke-box. ek On the other hand, when the group w as on their territory, its members acted like the bosses- disc- jockey had to play the music according to their choice.iliey did not allow anyone to approach their girls, and very often lliey tried to start a fight. If there was no cause, they would make one up Finally, their (as well as the members of oilier groups) favorite pastime was motorcycles and fast, noisy, night - driving through the city. Although the main reason for gathering ot this particular group (and the other territorial subcultural groups ot that time) was spatial oi territorial one. we have to note the common age of the members of the group. 1 la vi land says that "the institutionalization of age makes it clear that cultural rather than biological factors are of prime iimportance in determining social status", and that "theoretically speaking, membei ship in an age grade ought to be automatic: one reaches the appropriate age, and so one is included, without question, in tile particular age grade, .../ Sometimes, though, one has to buy one's way into the age grade for which one is eligible (Haviland 19HL 257), and sociologist Brake1' discusses the context of d ealing youth subcultures and says that "the young arc subjected to professional educational and economical changes in Certain historical moments, and they experience tho.se changes as a generation. That is why the majority of subcultures which are explicitly deviant are a part of the sub- 4 0/course, the Croatian rersion of the slogan rhymes. Here Is the original "Hajduk'i Dinam« 'dru su klubu hratsku sa njima w honosi citat u Hnatska." 5 Toradu is a supporting giyupftym spmcroatia. andtlmmit ten A-place atagameduriilg thelOSt couple of yea,s offormer) uoosiai ut S existence 6 This paper was published in a Belgrade magazine "Pulkuliinv" (Sghcuttitm). Unfortunately. when publishing a translation, the magazine didn l mention the name of the publication where the original had been jmhlished GLASNIK SED 36/1996, št. d 26 RAZGLABLJANJA culture ot the working-class young Namely, this group is the most sensitive (<)wards the economical changes, and the issue ih.it can he the usual class problem is experienced In a completely different way within the context of a new generation" (Brake 198(> 24) There is an irnportanl reason for a careful use of the term youth subcultures many members of subcultures who had built their subcultural identity as young people arc in their thiriies <>i forties toda\ and they have kept at least some part ot the sulx ultural identity from their youth. As Widd ¡combe and Wo off ill say. with ihe emergence of ibe punk sulxulture in 1 its to|h iwejs were only the young, which was vividly and comprehensively documented by the mass media (Wid dicombc and Vt'oolfitt 199S I 1) [ lowever, since the emergence ol punk it has been twenty yearn; many < >t punks f rom 1970s are no longer members of the punk subcultures, but some of them siii! arc I he same, il not even more obvious, can Ik- applied to members ol hippie. hea\ \ metal or I [ell's Angels subcultures. Since the scholar researches < >1 those sub-uhuves began ai the same time the sulxuluites developed, >i perhaps slightly later, it was logical that they should be defined as vonih Subcultures. However, concerning the age ot a part of subcultural population, this term is no more ap pi it able, ! there!' >re think that subcultures territorial, musk , or any other kind - cannot be treated merely as one ot the young subcultures but as a subgroup or subculture i >f the si >-eiety culture as a whole We also have to be aware hot only ol theoretical, but also (and especially) of practical inseparability of the terms subculture^ i lit I identity. \ame!j 1 Consider the creating of sulv cultural bcli inging U»)x* a kind of a paradox - if we accept the definition ol identity as a created not inherited notion, and as a dynamic process that is constructed and re] Hoduced <>ver time in direct relation to other groups t w liich actually means lo the Other side ol the opposition), clearly identity is based on differences That means that the basis of each of our (manifold) identities is an Opposition, i.e.. the comparison with something else The paradox appears when, wanting to be different, an indi\ ¡dual searches for his o\\ n pers< ma I way (>1 expressing the charai ieristic which he thinks makes linn different, but at the same lime (consciously ot sulxonscumsly) he accepts t haracteiislics of a group ol people that express their different es towards the dominant culture in the same or very similat w ay f c1 new members is to accept or not to accept a (subniltural) identih I agree with Hebdige who says that "the style no doubt made sense for the first wave of the self-conscious innovators on the level which is unapproachable for die i >nes that became the punks after the subculture made its appearance and intrigued the public, i'unk is unique concern-lng this matter there is a significant difference between the creators and the followers in every subculture" (llebdige 19N0; I 19). Sociologists dealt with subcultures mm h more often than ethnologists (not only in Croatia), while there were no systematic researches of youth or any other subcultures in Croatia. I therefore tlnnk thai it is important to point out some of the essential differences in ethnological and sociological ap proach to subcultures Sincere definition of sociology says that it is the systematic study ol behiivioi and human groups" and that "it focuses primarily on the influence of social relationships upon people's attitudes and behavior and on bow societies are established and changed" (Schaefei 1989: S), the sociologists have often defined sulxultures lis a reaction towards the class system. such as "the expressive forms that express the basic tension betw een the ones who have power and the ones who are determined lo inferiority and second-class lives" < Hebdige I9fs(): 127) oi a segment of society which shares a distinctive pattern ol mores, folkways, and values which differ from the pattern of the largei society" (.Schaefer I9H9: 79) According lo this, there are a number of ways thai subcultures develop . Subcultures may be based on common age (teenagers or old people), on region, oil ethnic heritage, or on beliefs (a militant political group). .. Subcultures often emerge because the dominant society has unsuccessfully attempted to suppress a practice regarded as improper, such as useoi ilk-gal drugs" (Schaefer I9K9: "9). I'erasbvic s,i\ s that "there are in > papers that make connection between f have ti > note the same or similar lent lent v i if non-acceptingtoi ignoring)the temtorial subcultural groups in iesearches on subculimes (i.e.. the approat h thai implies that the sty list k and musk subcultures are the only one). I'eia-s< >vic showed the merge ol suppixling and musii subcultures in some ol theli segments on the example of (¡real Britain and my example proves thai territorial subcultures that t:ikc pail in the supporting activities (during the period of' time w hen there w ere no organized supporting groups in former Yugoslavia, and the music sulx ultures were not mass movements. as I have already noted), and they have some ol the characteristics of today's supporting gr< >111«, but the territorial aspect oi their ¡dentilies still remains the primary one In distinction lo the sock ilogists. the ethnologists should examine the subculture in relation with the established ethnological categories, such as identity, age groups and age grades, territorial gatherings, etc It is also very important 10 establish what is the real identity oi members < if the dominant culture and what are the differences between their identity and the it I entity 1 it the members of a subculture within ihe saine culture Not paying attention to those similarities and differences could lead to a complete lelativizatipu of terms dominant cnltuJVand subculture. Anyway, lis I have already emphasized, the most important characteristic of the Mnrticerci group was spatial, so that their common age or ' Fur example, the ( 'niaitaii et/mologtsts trim dealt iiinx lly with the youth siiIkiiIiiiivs ttviv Ma/ti Porrzenmric (! 'jst .- /s ■ hyes Ptica ' , 19tfiS7, ami. Indirectly. Miliroj Vix/o/iijei (76). who ¡¡laced the high-school graduate ceivmonies of Zagreb si talents m the context if rem Cie limps theory if riles ufpassage. glasnik sed 36/1996, it. 4 5 RAZGLABLJANJA social stratum were not so important (after all. there was also a pan of the MartuU'vcigroup, although usually present only as passive observers, of the middle-class background). I ha i is why the studying of this type of subcultures requires comparison with bibliography on similar type of generational, hut primarily spatial gathering ot the young in rural settings, jasna Capo Žmegač writes about the boys' assoc iations in Isltia. Croatian Primorje, Dalmatia and Burgenland (Austria). In these places boys associations are more formal, with a Special ritual for admitting new members, while in the continental parts ot Croatia those associations are informal groups without firmer organization. Regardless of the firmness of their organization, those associations tend to intervene into the life of their communities ;it the same moments, such as when a boy visits a dance in another village, courts With girls from another village or even proposes One. Boys from the girl s village, assuming that they have a claim upon girls from their village, try to discourage bovs from other v illages - they make fun of them, chase them away and sometimes even beat them up. The boys also act as morality keepers in their communities. So. the function of boys' associations is not only organizing the social life of men of a certain age, but also contributing to the social control of the community (Čapo Žmegač 1995). Ii is thus obvious thai both in rural and urban settings that are not only spatlillly bul also temporally different, there is the same pattern of behavior. f ranted to show the complexity Of manifold identity ot a yotn h subculture, the construction ol identity according to the inner relationships of the members of the group, the shift in the construction of the territory-based idcntitv. and finally the essential differences between the ethnological and sock >-logical approaches to this subject. I also tried to confirm the theoretical conclusions that 1 offered at the end of the paper by using the materials that are urban, spatially and temporally close to us. REFERENCES CITED • BRAKE, Mike 1986: Potkullura kao analiličko orude u sociologiji /Su 1 Kultu re as an Anali ticaf Tool in Sociology in: Poikuliure 2. Beograd Pp. 14-26 • CAPO ŽMEGAČ, Jasna 199v Seoska druStveuosl / Rural Sociability Manuscript. Zagreb. • FANUKO, Nenad 1991: Okvir za razum i jeva nje ponašanja ekslrcmnih navijača /The Frame frir Understanding of the Extreme Supporters' Behaviour/. In: I'urio KADIN. ed. Zagrebački nogometni navijači; griipnt portret' s BBB u sredi.štu /Zagreb Football Supporters The Group Portrait with Bad Blue Boys in the Centre/. Institut za primijenjena društvena istražjvanja Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Zagreb Pp. 9-22. ■ GRLilC. Jadranka 1994: Mnogostruki identitet: prinijer Hrvata u Madarskoj /Manifold Identity: 'lic Case of the Croats in Hungary/. In: Studia etlmologica Croatica. Vol. 6. Zagreb. Pp. 119-126. - 1 iAVILANlWViHiaui A. 198 L Cultural Anthropology 1 lolt, Rinehan and Winston New York. • HEBD1GF., Dick 1980 (1979): Pbtkultura: značenje stila Subculture: The Meaning of Style/. Rad. Beograd • LALIČ, Dražcn 1993: Torcida. Pogled iznutra /Torcida; The View From Within . AGM Zagreb. • l.ÓFGREN. Orvar 1991: the Nationalization of Culture Constructing Swedisliness In: Studia ethnologica Vol. 3. Zagreb. Pp. Níí-t 16 • MESTROyiC, Matko 19SK: Kulturni identitet - ¿Zmedli egz.isicncije i utopije Cultural Identity Between Existence and Utopia/. In: Razvoj Development 5 i Pp i35-i-i8 • PER ASÍ »VIČ. Benjamin 1989: Nogometni navijači kao die > onilariinskc subkultltre Football Supporters is a Pan of Youth Subculture . In: Potkulture i. Beograd Pp. 57-6i • POVRZANOV1Č, Maja 198i-I9K5 Kultura mladih u Jugoslaviji. Pregled suvrejljenih etnoloških i socioloških ist ra Ž i vanja Youth Culture in Yugoslavia: Overview of the Contempdrary Ethnological and Sociological Research hr Kinološki pregled. Vol. 20-21. Beograd Pp. 39-58. • PRIČA. Ines 1987 DeOgradski šminkeri Belgrade šminkeri' In Potkuliure 3. Beograd Pp -43 • PIÍICA, Ines 19SH: Omladinska potkultura u Beogradu Youth -Subculture in Belgrade Master's thesis Manu .script 1367. Insilute of Ethnology and Folklore Research. Zagreb. • RA DIN, Fut ió 1991: Navijači u svom prirOdfiohi okruženjit Football Sup pollers in Their Natural Surroundings In ¡■lirio RADIN, ed. Zagrebački nogometni navijači gniptii port let s BBB u srcdišiu. Insmu za primijenjena društvena isti azi vanja Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagieb. Pp. 67-95 • SCllAIFER, Richard T. 1989: Sociology. McGraw-I lilt. Inc New York • TIM MS. D W G 1971: Tlie I iban Mosaic Towards a The ory of Residential Oiffereniiation. feambridge I ni\ersit\ Press (Cambridge, • VODOPIJA. Milivpj 1976: Maturiranje kao rite de passage 'Graduating as the Rite oí Passage Narodna umjetnost. Vol. 13. Zagreb. Pp. 77-92. • N^IDDICOMBE, Sue. and Robin WOOFFITT 199^ flu Language of Youth Subcultures Social Identity in Action Harvester wheatsheaf. New York. ■ /i JGIC, Zoran 1991; Mladi, sport i navijanje /Youth, Spon. and Supporting/, In: Furio RADIN, ed Zagrebački nogometni navijači: grupni poitrei s BBB u središtu. Institut za primijenjena društvena i straži vanja Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Zagreb. Pp 53-65. ó GLASNIK SED 36/1 996, Št. A RAZGLABLJANJA S;ižetak MNOGOSTKUKI IDENTITET ZA G REBAČKE TEK I TO RIJ A I.Nli SUBKULTURNE SKUPINE Sanja Kalapos fekst je zasnovan na Serenskome istraživanju u sklopu kojega je auiorica proučavala jedrni oil zagrebaCkih teiilorijalnih subkultumih skup in a koja je bila aklivna lijekom 60-ilSi i 70-ih godi na XX. siolječa. Ta k ve su se skupine uglavnom formirale u dijéíbvima grada na sjevernbj obali rijeke Save i dobivale su svoja imena prema gradskim čet vrt ima, ulicama ill ttgovima. Ova je skupina, čiji su članovi uglavnom i/ Martičeve i okolnih ulica, dobila naziv Martičevci. Auiorica govori o mnbgostrukom identiteti i Mart ice vaca, pri čemu krečeod razlika unntar skupine - na ime, posiojc (.Kije podskupine Martičevaca. od kojiji su jedni aktivni sudionid subkuliurc, dok su drugi lek pasivni promanad koji su s vremena na vrijeme (ovisno o okolnostima) prihvačeni kao ravno] i ravni člam >vi Nakon razlaganja le razlike, auiorica objašnjava prostorne pomake u konstrukciji identiteta, tj, pokazivanje kvartovskog, gradskog i liagrebačkog) i nadonitlnog (hrvai.skog) identiteta kroz aktivnost nogomet nog navijanja. 1' tu svrhu konzul tirana je literatura o navijačkim subkulluramu: iakb-tada.šiije subkulturne skupine nikako nisu bile prvenstveno navijač ke (od nos nO, uogomeino navijanje bila je samo jedna od njihovih aktiv nosli). neka se sociološka zapažanja o današnjim navi|ačiina mogu pnniijeniti na tactos nje pripadnike subkulluta Na kraju teksta auiorica na vodi na jos i (ovni je razlike izmedu sociološkog i etnološkog pristupa tem al ici subkuliura i prj lome zasnipa staja liste da etnolog mora proučavati siibkulture vi sklopu etab lira nth etnoloških kategorija Zbog toga je povučena panilela izmedu teritorija I nih subkulttira mladih u ruralniin i urbanim društvi m a Povzetek MNOGOTERA IDENTITETA ZAGKIÍ JiS K ET EK IT O KIA LN E PODKUETURNE SKUPINE Sanja Kalapoš Besedili»je zasnovano na terenski raziskavi, pri kateri jeavl< irica preučevala eno od zagrebških teritorialnih podkultutoih Skupin, ki je delovala v 60-ih in 70-ih letih dvajsetega Stoletja takšne skupine so v glavnem nastale v mestnih predelih na severni obali reke Save in so dobivate svoja imena po mestnih čel rte h, ulicah in trgih. (>biavna\ ana skupina je dobila nnc Martičevci, ker so bili njeni člani \ glavnem iz. Marličeve in sosednjih ulic. Vvtorica govori o mnogoteri identiteti Martičevceu, pri čemer izhaja iz razlik znotraj skupine, t >bsta|ali sla namreč dve podskupini Martičevceu. izmed katerih so bili eni dejavni soudeleženci pod kulture, medlem ko so bili drugi le pasivni opazovalci, ki so bili le od časa do časa (odvisno od okoliščin > sprejet i kot enakopravni člani lJo razlagi te razlike avtorica pojasnjuje premike v konstrukciji identitete, tj, izkazovanje identitete četrti, mesme (zagrebške) in nacionalne (hrvaške) identitele skozi dejavnost nogometnega navijanja. V ta namen se je naslonila na literaturo o navijaških podkullurah. Čeprav takratni; podkullurne skupine nikakor niso bile v prvi vrsti nav ijaške (nogometno navijanje je bila samo ena od njihovih dejavnosti), je mogoče uporabiti nekatera sociološka spoznanja o sodobnih navijačih za razumevanje tedanjih pripadnikov podkulmi Na koncu besedila avtorica navaja najbolj temeljne razlike med sociološkim in etnološkim pristopom k tematiki pod-kullur ter pri tem zastopa stališče, da mora etnolog preučevali podknllure v sklopu etahliranih etnoloških kategorij. Zaradi tega potegne vzporednico med tentorial niifti pod kultura mi mladih v atralnem in Urbanem okolju. GLASNIK SED 3Ó/199Ó, št. 4 7