Postjugoslavenska književnost i njezin plural – između privida revolucije i straha od restauracije

This paper analyses the phrase post ­Yugoslav literature in relation to the plural form of post ­Yugoslav literatures, which is then followed by a prescriptivist practice that pro-ofreads the singular as a spelling error in the plural. To answer the question whether these concepts are really interchangeable, the paper first examines the history of the relationship opposing the singular and the plural of Yugoslav literature(s) with regard to the polemics that this opposition produced in the SFRY period. Starting from the 1960s, two fundamental approaches to this issue could be distinguished: 1. integralist/syncretic (in which at times culturally hegemonic and at times utopian idealistic ideologemes were hidden) and 2. plura-list/particularist (motivated mainly by resistance to the former and by either protecting or promoting certain national interests). Given that the unique history of Yugoslav literature, despite all efforts, was never written, except as a synthesis of national literatures, post-Yugo-slav literature cannot be the result of its continuity either. Therefore, a conclusion on post-Yugoslav literature as one of the post-Yugoslav literatures that does not stem from the orga-nicist conception of “birth” from Yugoslav literature, but owes its beginning to the end, is preceded by a presentation of several current theoretical approaches in which the sharpest differences are made in the relationship between the concepts of “transnational” (minority, decentralised) and “supranational” (syncretic, hegemonic).